Best Musclecar Movie Chases revisited......

I get a lot of mail about stuff I posted two or three years ago. That's ok, I agree with Madonna-any attention is good attention.  Anyhow some people have asked me to go over a couple of old posts again. I aim to please, so here we go. First off-my picks are limited to flicks featuring musclecars, or at least American cars.  This disqualifies "Ronin", the "Transporter", "The Italian Job", and others featuring import cars. Those were great flicks with great action, but were talking about musclecars, not everything ever done.  Anyhow, here's my rankings. # 1. "To Live and Die in L.A."  I can hear purists screaming now that "Bullitt" isn't in the top spot.  Hear me out. "To Live and Die in L.A." starred a pre-CSI  William Peterson as a Secret Service agent obsessed with catching a counterfeiter that murdered his partner. The counterfeiter was played with evil glee by a young Willem Dafoe. Peterson and his partner decide to rip off another criminal to get the front money for Dafoe. The mark turns about to be an underover FBI agent. Shit goes sideways, and Peterson and his buddy flee with many feds in pursuit. The action is great as Petersen ( or his stunt double ) pilots a Chevy Caprice cop car the wrong way down the LA freeway. It's exciting and realistic. Others have copied it over the years-but no one has been able to top William Freidkin's work here-( He also directed "The French Connection" which is on this list too). It tops "Bullitt" for two reasons-as great as it was-it's still fun to watch 50 years later-they pass the same VW multiple times, and the Charger loses 8 hubcaps in the chase if you watch closely and count. And that falls on the film editing dept, not Carey Loftin ( the stunt coordinator ) or Peter Yates ( the director ) or Steve McQueen. ( The Star ).  # 2. "Bullitt" This is the grandaddy of them all, the one that started it. Steve McQueen was an avid auto and motorcycle racer in his spare time. It bolstered his macho image when it was said that he did his own stunt driving in this film. He did some-he overshot a turn, smoked the tires a lot-that's all in the film. However the heavy lifting was done by Carey Loftin in the Mustang and Bill Hickman in the Charger. It still looks good today because they didn't undercrank the camera-( a trick to make cars look like they were going faster than they were ). They tried it and it looked like shit. So McQueen, Loftin and Hickman were going up to 115 mph at times. If you watch closely-besides the Charger losing 8 hubcaps, the gas station actually blows up BEFORE the Charger hits the pumps ( one of the stunt guys who was supposed to detonate the charges-screwed up) but it's incredible considering it's 50 years old, and except for those minor mistakes it's still viable today.  # 3. "Vanishing Point".  This cult classic deserves all it's accolades. Barry Newman was awesome as Kowalski-a sad Vietnam Vet who-as we see in flashbacks-has been a car and motorcycle racer, and a  Cop, who lost his wife in a surfing accident. He bets his drug dealer the tab for some speed that he can make it from Denver to San Francisco in 15 hours in his hot rod 1970 Challenger. Much automotive mayhem ensues-( Carey Loftin was stunt coordinator on this one too ) and he's helped by a black,blind,clairvoyant DJ named "Super Soul" ( beautifully done by a young Cleavon Little; this was before he shot to fame in "Blazing Saddles " ) and along the way he meets a snake charmer, two gay guys who try to rob him, and a naked dirt-bike rider.  The police put bulldozers on the highway to stop him and the finale is amazing. Newman's smile as he drive's toward the bulldozers at full speed is ethereal. The car that blows up is actually a junk 1967 Camaro with the engine compartment packed with explosives and an impact-sensitive switch that Loftin towed toward the bulldozers at 80 mph behind the Challenger camera car and pulled over at the last second after releasing a quick-release tow cable. It works spectacularly. It looks like they actually drove a car into the bulldozers. Plus the hero dying in a blaze of glory was a shock. Back then ( 1971 ) hollywood was big on "happy" endings, so this definitely wasn't the norm. I love this movie, no matter how many times I've seen it.  # 4. "White Lightning".  Arguably Burt Reynolds' best movie. A pure southern-fried revenge tale. Burt is Robert "Gator" McCluskey, a moonshiner who's in prison when the film opens. Hearing his younger, college-boy brother was killed under dubious circumstances after being arrested by a corrupt sheriff, he makes a deal to get out of prison if he can prove the sheriff is taking bribes from whiskey runners and other criminals. The Feds supply him with a 1971 Ford Custom sedan that's been customized with a 429 and a 4-speed. ( You have to overlook a scene where he obviously puts an automatic column shifter in park. Maybe there was more than one stunt car ). Great automotive action, a poignant romance between "Gator" and a trailer-park Barbie nicknamed "Shake a Puddin" ( an awesome performance by Jennifer Billingsley ) and of course it comes down to a showdown between "Gator" and the corrupt sheriff ( played sadistically by Ned Beatty, who was the meek businessman raped in "Deliverance". That's range as an actor ). Good story,good acting, good action. Overall a satisfying revenge flick.  The sequel-"Gator" starring Burt and Lauren Hutton was awful. # 5. "The French Connection". Gene Hackman was great as "Popeye" Doyle, a New York detective trying to break up an international narcotics ring. After being shot at by a sniper he pursues the man on foot who jumps onto a subway train, that's going on overhead bridges. Hackman hijacks a Pontiac Tempest and chases the subway train through the streets, sometimes going the wrong way. It's a great scene with great action. The only reason it didn't rank higher is the film is actually kind of boring before the chase, as they show how the dealers operate and Hackman's frustration at the bureucracy of the police department. But it won Oscars and it's certainly worth watching, if for the chase scene alone.  # 6. "The Seven-Ups"  Roy Scheider stars as the leader of an elite police unit that only investigates serious felonies-that carry a minimum sentence of 7 years or more. Hence-the title. He finds out that someone is kidnapping high-ranking mobsters for ransom, and then killing them even if the organization pays the ransom. There's an awesome chase between two '74 Pontiacs, a black Grand Ville and a silver Ventura. Scheider ( or his stunt double ) is driving the Ventura and Bill Hickman ( who drove the Charger in "Bullitt" ) piloted the Grand Ville. It ends with the Ventura crashing into the rear of a perked semi.  # 7. "Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry". This one had a good plot. Peter Fonda is an ex-race car driver who plans to fund his return to NASCAR by robbing a Wal-Mart type superstore, by kidnapping the manager's wife and kids, and forcing him to give up the weekend's take in exchange for getting his family back.  The kidnapping plot is plausible, and would fly today-you'd just have to change the dollar amounts. Susan George is a one-night stand he takes along. Her major contribution is she spends the entire movie barefoot in a straining halter top and hip-hugger jeans that barely cover her ass-crack. There's some good automotive action early on in a '66 Caprice, which they dump in favor of a '69 440 Charger. Then the action really ramps up as Fonda tries to elude not only cop cars but a crazed sheriff in a helicopter played by Vic Morrow. He and Susie trade wise cracks while his mechanic and partner bitches that he's "overdriving" the car.  The fiery crash into a train at the end was used in the opening credits of the Lee Majors TV show "The Fall Guy" for years. Overall an entertaining action flick.  # 8. "Smokey & The Bandit" Burt Reynolds and his pal Hal Needham were basically playing grab-ass on-screen in this light-hearted action-comedy. It ended up out-grossing everything but "Star Wars" in 1977, and sold about a quarter-million Trans-Ams for Pontiac.  Burt's character-"Bandit" bets Big Enos-$80,000 he can bring back 400 cases of Coors beer from Texarkana to Atlanta in 28 hrs.  Burt drives the T/A, Jerry Reed drives the truck and they pick up Sally Field along the way who jilted a hillbilly at the alter. There pursued by the hillbilly and his dad-Sheriff Buford T. Justice. Jackie Gleason almost steals the show as the redneck, foul-mouth sheriff who doesn't care that he's hundreds of miles out of his jurisdiction, he's going to get the Bandit at all cost. Lots of chases with Burt and Hal sliding the T/A around, and a lot of gimme-five humor. For a mindless action-comedy, it's really cute and entertaining.  It spawned two sequels that were just awful. I'm sure a lot of people will gripe that this one didn't rank higher. Don't get me wrong; I liked it when it came out when I was in high school and I still like it. I watch it if it comes on TNT or one of the other cable networks once in a while. But since were also comparing action and storyline-this was fine for what it was-a dipshit comedy. But "Live and Die in L.A.", "Bullitt", even Burt's own-"White Lightning" and the others had serious storylines and better action.  But I agree no list of car-chase flicks would be complete without the "Bandit".  I know I'll hear griping about some of the "Fast&Furious" flicks being left off. Too much CGI and not believable stunts. Using hydraulic jacks and having the Charger smoke the tires and wheelie at the same time?  If your smoking the tires, you don't have enough traction to wheelie!!  Putting lead in the bumper of the Chevelle and Camaro to make them wheelie, and mounting a GN body backwards on the frame to make it look like Vin Diesel was going 70 in reverse was certainly innovative-but regular cars-no matter how much horsepower they had couldn't do that stuff. I'll go to the movies with a certain amount of suspension of disbelief-you have to to watch a James Bond flick-but the F&F movies went from bad to worse. Dropping cars out of planes onto a country road with pinpoint accuracy? Bringing down a 747 with cars?  Jumping the Mclaren or Lamborghini or whatever it was from skyscraper to skyscraper, not once, but twice?  Come on, man!!  I know I left a few favorites out  "Eat My Dust" and "Bobbi Jo and the Outlaw" to name a couple but I felt they didn't measure up to the others. Let me know if I missed any classics. Mastermind       

For god's sake.....Sometimes you have to "Run what you brung!!!".....

I don't know what it is, but I think sometimes people think something is cooler if it's hard to do. I never went to that school. I was always taught to take the path of least resistance. At least when it came to working on cars. I say this because of several conversations I've had with people the last few weeks. Hot August Nights was just here so I got to talk to more people than usual about the projects their working on or considering buying. One guy was considering buying a '57 T-Bird. It was in good condition and had the 292 Y-Block V8 backed by a 3-speed manual trans. It had a Hurst shifter on the floor which a previous owner had added way back in the '70's. Otherwise it was all there. I thought it was kind of cool, as most of the '55-57 T-Birds I had seen over the years were automatics. He asked me what it would take to convert it to an automatic. Groan. "More trouble than it's worth." I said. I explained how Fords all had different bellhousing bolt-patterns, and that finding a correct Ford-o-Matic that would bolt up to a '55-57 292 / 312 V8 would be very hard, as would finding the other pieces-shift linkage,crossmember, rear trans mount, neutral safety switch, etc.  I suggested that if he wanted an automatic '55-57 T-Bird, that he just look for another car-as I said almost every other one I had ever seen had a slushbox, including several at this year's HAN auction!!  "So it's possible." he said. Ugh! Manned space flight is possible, but's it's not cheap or easy! Another guy who was looking at a '62 Gran Prix asked me a similar question. This car had the 389 / "Slim Jim" Hydramatic automatic trans combo. He asked me how hard it would be to install a TH400. "Impossible" I said. "Unless you look for a '65 and later model and get the engine and transmission together regardless if it was a 389,400,421 / 428 or 455. " I explained that up until 1963 Pontiacs had the starter mounted on the bellhousing. In 1964 they started mounting the starter on the engine block. I told him about a guy I knew who swapped a TH400 into a pre-'63 Pontiac-and then discovered that he had nowhere to mount the starter.  I further explained that some late '63 blocks had the pad to mount the starter machined in to the block, so you could tap the block and then use a later trans and starter behind those. However-if his 1962 model had the original engine-it would not have this pad machined into the block, and there would be no where to mount the starter. I said I didn't like the "Slim Jims" because they wouldn't shift above about half-throttle, and perhaps he should consider converting it to a 4-speed, as it would be more feasible than changing the engine and transmission, and the 4-speed would make it more desirable even if it wasn't original. I pointed out that in Buff magazines and on the internet, a lot of companies offered the pedals, clutch linkage,bellhousing etc to convert the '59-63 Pontiacs to stick. I pointed out that used Muncie 4-speeds could be bought off the internet for as little as $500, and that Summit sold brand new Richmond T10s for about $1,500. "Could a good machine shop put the starter mounting pad on my block?"  NOOO!!!!  There's no material on the block to machine!! If you want to upgrade the tranny-you have to do the stick conversion, or find a later 389 / 400 / TH400 from a '65 and later car. Those are your only choices." "Unless your really lucky and a previous owner put a '64-66 389 in the car." "You'll have the factory machined pad to mount the starter on the block, but that also means your motor is not numbers-matching to the car." "You've got a real "Catch 22" there pal."  "There must be some other way."  ARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!  "I just gave you your only two choices!!"  Still another guy was looking at a 1990 Rally Sport Camaro. It had a throttle-body injected 305 backed by a T5 5-speed manual. Chevrolet sold a ton of these from 1989-92 as they were several thousand cheaper than the Z/28 / IROC-Z. He asked me how hard it would be to convert it to Tuned Port Injection. "Too hard and too expensive". I said. He would need the whole system, the mass airflow sensor and the wiring harness, which you'd have to pirate from a TPI car. However, the LB9 and L98 TPI engines are valuable, and most junkyards want to sell the whole engine for a pretty penny to people restoring '85-91 Corvettes and IROC-Z's and T/A's, and won't let you just take the intake manifold and injectors. Further-I said-"Edelbrock makes a Performer manifold and matching cam for TBI engines that would really "Wake up" the 305. And Rally Sport Camaros had 3.08:1 gears. 3.73:1s would be an easy swap that would give a stunning improvement in acceleration through the first 4 gears, and that since 5th is overdrive, it wouldn't hurt highway cruising rpm. These simple mods would give him a huge performance increase-enough to easily outrun a stock Tuned Port Model.  Also if he wanted to swap in a 350-the TBI manifold and throttle body would adequately feed a 350. Like talking to the wall. He thanked me and decided to start searching for a complete TPI system for sale.....Good luck with that.  The last guy had bought a nice '73 Duster that had been very well maintained. It had a 318 with a 3-speed manual. He inquired about converting it to a 340 / 4-speed. "That's do-able, but probably too expensive." I said. "The reason is the 340 was only used from 1968-73 and are pretty rare, and thus pricey."  I suggested he go to a junkyard and find a Dodge Dakota with the 318 "Magnum" engine and a 5-speed stick and get the engine and tranny. Edelbrock makes manifolds to run a carburator on '92 and later "Magnum" engines. Hurst makes aftermarket shifters for these trannys. You might have to shorten the driveshaft and adapt the Dakota rear trans mount to the transmission crossmember, but that's not too hard.  I pointed out that the 318 Magnum / 5-speed combo would probably have better performance than a stock 340 / 4-speed, and would have better drivability and fuel economy. I also suggested a 360 Magnum out of a Dodge Truck or Jeep Grand Cherokee, in front of his stock 3-speed. I also suggested he sell his pristine Duster for a profit and look for a 340 model. Nope. He's searching for a used 340. I wish him luck, I just don't think he's going to find a deal on a running or at least rebuildable 340. Maybe I'm wrong, and he will find a deal. Like Jimmy the Greek used to say-"The race may not always be to the swift or the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet."  Take the path of least resistance-you'll be much happier. Mastermind           

Buy the right car.....even if it costs more initially....you'll be ahead in the long run...

I talk to so many people that make the wrong decision when buying or restoring a musclecar. Usually these are people who are not mechanics or bodymen by trade and they "bite off more than they can chew" and end up with a money pit that never gets done, or gets sold in disgust a year or two later.  Here's how to avoid this. # 1. I've said it before-but it needs to be said again. A special or rare car missing key components is not a deal at any price. Obvious examples would be any Hemi powered Chrysler vehicle without the Hemi engine, or a Boss 302 or 429 Mustang sans the "Boss" engine. You found an engineless Thunderbolt Fairlane in some hillbilly's barn for peanuts? Great-where in the hell are you going to find a running or at least rebuildable side-oiler 427 ??!! And at what price? Where are you going to find a complete fuel-injection system for a '57 Bonneville or '63 Corvette?  Where are you going to find a complete, Ram Air IV 400 Pontiac or SD-455 to put into that engineless GTO Judge or Trans-Am that you "stole?" A '69 Z/28-where are you going to find a 302 Chevy with the one year only "DZ" block? You could stuff a badass GMPP 350 crate motor in it, but that would piss off a lot of buyers if you ever wanted to sell it!  Let's say you find a really nice '65 Impala SS sans engine. Sure you could simply stuff a 350 or 454 crate motor into it, but that would detract from it's value to most people. Do you think you might have a bit of trouble locating a 327 or a 396 with 1965 date codes?  And that's a Chevy I'm talking about-god help you if your trying to find 390 AMC engine for an AMX!  # 2. Get the powertrain you want. I talked to a guy who had an L98 IROC-Z. That's the 350 'Vette engine backed by a TH700R4.  A buddy of his had an LB9 Trans-Am. The TPI 305 backed by a 5-speed stick. Even though the 350 / Automatic IROC-Z was faster in a drag race, he thought his pal's 305 / 5-speed T/A was much more fun to drive. He asked me how hard it would be to convert the IROC-Z to a stick. "Too hard, and too expensive" I said. I told him-if he really wanted a manual-trans Camaro or Firebird-the best thing to do would be sell his car and go buy one with a factory 5-speed. I told him he didn't have to limit himself to LB9 cars; that there are plenty of carburated LG4 and L69 305 F-Bodies with 5-speeds out there,and with very little work-an Edelbrock intake and a cat-back exhaust-could easily match or beat the L98's performance.  Don't fall into the buff magazine's "It's an easy conversion" trap. For a professional mechanic with $40,000 worth of tools in a state of the art shop, that may be true. For "Joe Average" with hand tools in his driveway, not so much. For example you get a screaming deal on a 318 / automatic powered '70 Challenger. You decide you'll just "drop" a 440 in it later. Really?  Because 1st off you'd need a big-block K-member, big-block torsion bars, heavier springs, a big-block radiator, a 727 trans ( a 904 won't bolt up to or hold up to a 440 ) and a new rear end. The 8.25 that comes with slant-six / 318 models won't do. You'll need an 8.75 at least. Then-the 440's been out of production for 41 years!! Where are you going to find one? And worse yet-all the brackets for the alternator, power steering pump, etc? The belt pulleys, the balancer?  It's a lot more trouble than just "dropping" an engine in!!  So don't buy a 350 Malibu with the intent of swapping a 454 into it.  If you want a big-block Chevelle, then step up and pay the price for an SS396 or 454.  Don't buy a 289 / 302 Cougar or Mustang and plan on swapping in a 351C or 390. Just get a 351C or 390 model to begin with.  # 3. Get the options you want. At least the major ones. Like front disc brakes, or power steering or air conditioning. Those factory options definitely add value and drivability. Other stuff-you can easily add a hood tach to any '60's GTO or Firebird. Spoilers, stripes, vinyl tops, different wheels, that stuff is easily added or removed. But trying to add disc brakes to something can be a real pain in the ass. On some cars you might need different spindles and different control arms.  # 4. Something with major rust issues or body damage or water or fire damage is not a deal at any price. They are endless money pits-because they are always in worse shape than they initially appear to be. Just spend more money and get a better car to start with. # 5. Don't get stuck on "Just as it left the Factory".  I'm not talking about modifying the engine here. Even if it's a 318 model- A bright red '69 Charger with a white interior and a white top and Magnum 500 wheels is way cooler and will sell for way more money ( if you do decide to sell it ) than an Olive-drab green one with green interior and dog-dish hubcaps, even thought it's "original".  A '78 Trans-Am painted white and blue like a "Macho T/A" with blue or black interior is way cooler and will sell for way more than a canary yellow one with red interior!! I hate the green and brown "earth tones" that GM was big on in the late '60's and early '70's. If you want to paint your car a non-stock color do it, or if you want bucket seats instead of a bench-by all means do it.  Good luck and I hope this saves some people from making a bad decision. Mastermind       

Stuff I DON'T hate.....

It's funny the perceptions that people develop. I've been called out several times by people asking why I "Hate" Fords.  This stems from two posts. One was several years ago talking about classic chase scenes in movies featuring musclecars. I quoted a 1987 interview with Carey Loftin who was stunt coordinator on "Bullitt".  He said that Steve McQueen didn't want two Fords in the chase. However since Ford had the contract to supply cars to Warner Brothers, GM and Chrysler refused to give them cars. He and McQueen bought the Charger from a Bay Area Dodge dealer with their own money. The Charger was a 440 / 4-speed. The Mustangs supplied by Ford were 390 / 4-speeds. Loftin said in early practice the Charger would leave the Mustang so badly that they couldn't even film it. Steve McQueen was furious. Loftin and his mechanic Max Balchowski hopped up one of the Mustangs with Hooker Headers and dual exhausts with shorty glasspacks ( which is why it sounds so badass ) an Edelbrock intake and 750 Holley double-pumper carb and a Mallory distributor. Now McQueen and Bill Hickman ( the Charger driver ) could play cat and mouse sucessfully. The other problem was-going up to 115 mph through the streets of San Francisco-the Charger had no problems except throwing hubcaps off. If you watch the film closely-the Charger loses 8 hubcaps in the chase. The Mustangs were falling apart-breaking shock towers and other suspension parts, door handles falling off, etc. Loftin and Balchowsky worked every night taking parts off the other cars to keep the camera car running. Now some people say this article "Bashes" Fords. How? I simply re-printed what was written in the original article. What was I supposed to do? Lie?  Accuse Carey Loftin of being a liar?  The second thing is when I wrote a post about engine swapping. I simply said that unlike a small-block Chevy or Pontiacs, or AMC engines or small and big-block Chryslers where just about everything interchanges, Fords are all different. They are!!  A 390 in an LTD has a different oil pan, water pump, alternator and power steering brackets than a 390 in a T-Bird,which is different than a 390 in a Mustang, which is different than a 390 in an F100 pickup. And unlike the others-Fords have different bellhousing bolt patterns. A 289 /302 is different from a 351C, which is different from a 390 / 428.  Unlike a Chevy where you could bolt a TH350 or 400 up to anything from a 283 to a 454, or a Pontiac where you could do the same to anything from a 326 to a 455.  How does that "Bash" Fords?  I'm simply stating an irrefutable fact-that Fords don't have the easy parts interchangeability of GM and Chrysler stuff. Which novice engine-swappers need to know!!  Further-I've owned two Ford F150 pickups both bought brand-new and paid off and kept 8 or 10 years. I've had 2 Mustangs-a '66 GT and an '83 "5.0".  I don't "hate" Fords. If I could find one that wasn't priced in the stratosphere I'd love to have a '55-57 T-Bird, or a '67-70 390 Cougar, or a '69-70 Mach 1 with a 351W.  I'd even settle for one of the "Eleanor" clones that are popular-'67-68 Mustang fastbacks done up like the one in "Gone in 60 Seconds"-the one with Nicolas Cage and Angelina Jolie- not the classic with H.B/ Halicki.  The other thing I get is people say I "hate" modern fuelie swaps. Wrong again. If you want to put the engine and tranny out of a '95 "5.0" Mustang into a '66 Mustang-of which 600,000 were built go ahead, make your day. Just don't do it to a K-code, 271 hp solid-lifter, 4-speed GT or a Shelby GT350 !!  You want to put an LS motor and a 4L80E  into a beater LeMans go ahead. Just don't use a numbers-matching Judge!!  You want put an SRT8 Hemi in a 318 Charger-knock yourself out. But don't do it to a for real numbers matching 440 R / T model !!!  That's all I've ever said. But somehow it got misquoted and misconstrued. Hope this clears things up. Mastermind 

"Class Acts" of the internet.....At least their entertaining.....

There must be an etiquette guideline for posting on the Internet somewhere.  It must read like this:  If something early in a post rubs you the wrong way, stop reading and vent your anger immediately. Use profanity so the writer knows you mean business. If the writer responds with irrefutable proof that you are wrong-i.e.-by citing a sentence or paragraph you failed to read, or other sources-Factory Literature, magazine road tests, etc-you are under no obligation to apologize. Simply slink away until the next thing offends you and you can spew your noxious venom on someone else. Apparently some people were mortally offended by a couple sentences in my last post. Specifically saying that the '73 Hurst / Olds was faster than a '72 SS454 Chevelle and that a '72 455 Gran Prix was faster than '72 440 Road Runner. I found two road tests for a '72 SS454 Chevelle. Both were 4-speeds with 3.31:1 gears. One ran a 15.1 in the 1/4, the other a 14.7.  I couldn't find any road tests of a '73 Hurst / Olds . I did find two road tests of a '73 Cutlass 442 with the 455 / TH400 powertrain, and 3.23:1 gears.  One ran a 14.90; the other a 14.65.  Those times are very close, and in a real-world drag race it might be too close to call or the winner could be who took off with less wheelspin. However the fact remains-that my statement was accurate-the Olds was quicker in the 1/4, if only by a tenth or two. Ditto for the Pontiac vs Mopar race. I found two Mopar road tests from '72 one for a 440 Charger, the other for a 440 Road Runner. The Road Runner ran a 15.35. The Charger ran a 15.12. The '72 GP SJ with a 455 ran a 15.0. Again, that's slight, but accurate. I love these guys with their insane "Brand Loyalty" like "Calvin" ( of the comic strip "Calvin&Hobbes" ) pissing on a Chevy Bow-Tie or Ford Blue Oval. Grow up guys and learn to do math. A couple of my personal favorites were the guy who said I was lying when I said my Ram Air III, 4-speed, 4.33:1 geared '69 Judge had beaten my buddies Torqueflite equipped, 3.23:1 geared 440 / Six-Pack Super Bee in a drag race.  Any experienced drag racer knows that the 4.33;1 gears alone would give me the win since the cars weighed about the same-3,700 lbs and had similar power out put-366 hp vs 390. However I also freely admitted that my GTO was not stock-it had Hooker Headers, a hot Crane Cam, and an Offenhauser dual-quad intake with two AFBs.  So yeah, there's no way a 400, 4-speed GTO with those mods and and 4.33:1 gears could beat a bone-stock Six-Pack Super Bee with an automatic and 3.23:1 gears!!  Cause Mopars rule and Pontiacs suck right?  Ditto for the guy who scoffed when I said my dad's Tri-Power 421 '65 2+2 had beaten a buddy's '67 427 Impala SS in a drag race. Ok. The Impala had the Q-jet equipped 390 hp 427, a TH400 and 3.31:1 gears. The 2+2 had the 376 hp Tri-Power 421, a TH400, and 3.90:1 gears.  Again-in addition to the gearing advantage-I freely admitted that the 421 had '67 GTO #670 heads ( whose closed chamber 2.11 / 1.77 valved big port heads flowed way better than the 1.96 / 1.66 "bathtub" '59-66 heads ) a 301 / 313 duration RAIII cam with 1.65:1 rockers, the tri-power intake port-matched to the gasket, the carbs custom jetted, and the 421 "HO" exhaust manifolds ported and extrude-honed and a TransGo shift kit in the trans. So ok, yep there's no way a 421 Catalina with all those trick parts and 3.90:1 gears could outrun a bone-stock 427 Impala with 3.31:1s!!  Because there's no way a 421 Pontiac can outrun a Big-block Chevy right?  The all-time best was the guy who said I was living on "Fantasy Island" when I said my friend's '83 Z/28 was a great sleeper and had shown it's taillights to many "5.0" Mustangs as well as many L98 Corvettes and and a couple of Grand Nationals. The Camaro was a 305 / 5-speed model with 3.73:1 gears. We installed Hedman Headers with O2 hookup and real dual exhausts-( no catalytic converter , illegal, but we did it ). We also added an Edelbrock Performer Intake and matching Performer cam and lifters. Since a stock '83 Z/28 ran low 15s in the 1/4-it would be easy to see how ours with all those mods could easily run low-14s-easily quick enough to beat a "5.0" Mustang or L98 'Vette and enough to give any stock GN a run for the money they'd never forget.  The cam ( that was designed for a 350, not a 305 ) took away a little bottom-end torque but that helped us launch and the massive improvement in the mid-range and top-end was well worth the trade. He could pop the clutch at 4,500 rpm and rocket off the line with just enough wheelspin to get the engine up on it's torque curve. Powershifting at 5,600 rpm, we'd beat most challengers off the line so bad ( 5.0 Mustang owners were notorious for frying their tires ) and hold onto it till well over 100 mph. If GN drivers didn't fry the tires, that could be anybody's run. L98 'Vettes? Either stick or auto our "Holeshot" would usually carry us to victory by at least two car lengths, maybe three. It was just the right combination. I love the doubters-I didn't say the car ran 12s-I said it ran low 14s-which is eminently reasonable considering the combination of parts we had. Anyhow before you start berating someone and calling them names-actually read what they wrote and understand it.  Or not-just get another "Calvin" pissing on a Chevy or Ford emblem bumper sticker......Mastermind         

What is a "Musclecar" in the public's narrow definition?.....

I had a reader comment on the post about 2 bbl musclecars. His opinion was that a car with a 2 bbl carb and single exhaust is not a musclecar.  I responded with the question-"You don't think a '68-74 Charger with a 383 or 400 V8 is a Musclecar?" "Or a '67-70 Mustang with a 390, or a '70-74 Firebird with a 400 V8?"  Because of the carburator and exhaust system?  How does that work?  Another guy said that no "Real" musclecars were built after 1972!!  Still another said no "REAL" musclecars had automatic transmissions.  Really?  The 1973-74 SD-455 Trans-Am is not a musclecar??  A '73 Charger with a 440 , a Torqueflite and 3.55 geared 8 3/4 is NOT a musclecar?  The 1976 T/A with a 455 and a 4-speed or the '79 with a 400 and a 4-speed is not a musclecar?  The Buick Grand National is not a musclecar? I had a '73 Hurst / Olds 442 with a 455. Is it not a musclecar because it has an automatic trans or because it was built after '72?  Is the 717 hp Charger Hellcat NOT a musclecar because it has an automatic and 4-doors??  Come on guys. You can poke fun at "Bandit" T/A's or 80's "5.0" Mustangs and 305 and 350 powered Camaros and Firebirds from that era, but the bottom line is they were the fastest cars available at that time, and kept the flame alive, which is why we got cool stuff like the Grand National, and why we now can buy 500 hp Mustangs and 700 hp Challengers off the showroom floor. Is a '75 Monte Carlo with a 454 or a '76 Gran Prix with a 455 or a '76 Torino with a 460 NOT a musclecar? They have single exhaust, right?  Or you could say their not a musclecar, their a "Personal Luxury Coupe" which is what the buff magazines called them back then.  Really?  Isn't that kind of splitting hairs? I Remember years ago a magazine writer claimed that the Porsche 928 was NOT a sports car because it  was available with an automatic transmission. Now almost all the supercars are autos. But according to this guy the Nissan GTR, Jaguar F-type, and Audi R8 are NOT sports cars because none of them have manual transmissions!!  Ok, bud keep your 1950's TR3 without synchros, because REAL men drive 4-cylinder, two seat convertibles with sticks!!  Or shut the fuck up and go buy a Miata!! But don't tell me that a Nissan GTR isn't a badass sports car!!  Several years ago Webster's or Funk and Wagnalls had a definition of a Musclecar. It read- "A compact or mid-size american sedan with a powerful mid-size or large V8 engine, designed to accelerate rapidly." Like the Road Runner cartoon's definition- "Accelerati Rapidus Maximus" .  Let's stop arguing semantics. I mean really-a '72 Chevelle with a 454 is a musclecar, but a '73 Hurst / Olds is not, even though the '73 Olds is quicker in the 1/4 ?  A '72 Road Runner with a 440 is a musclecar, but a '72 Gran Prix SJ with a 455 is not, even though the GP is quicker in the 1/4?  We all love our musclecars, new and old.  Mastermind               

Is a carburator worth $5,000, or $10,000 ?......

I see a phenomenon that I just can't fathom. I saw it again at this year's Hot August  Nights auction. I don't want to call anybody stupid, but I can't think of any other way to describe it.  What I'm talking about is musclecars with 2 bbl carbs from the factory. Their way more plentiful than you think. I have seen a lot of Chargers and Satellites and Coronets with 2 bbl 383s and 400s. And I have seen people pass up these really nice cars and pay more money for one with a 4 bbl that isn't as nice. It's insane. Maybe because they were standard engines or a slight upgrade over a 318 say-they were purchased by older people and were better kept and much less abused than their 4 bbl counterparts. And it's not just a Chrysler thing. I've seen a lot of 1969-73 Mach 1 Mustangs with 2 bbl 351W's and 351C's. Cougars too. I've seen many 289 2 bbl '64-68 Mustangs, and I've seen several 2 bbl 390 models. I've seen many 350 2bbl Cutlasses and Buick Skylarks, and tons of 350 powered LeMans and Firebird models. I've seen quite a few Esprit Firebirds and Luxury LeMans models and Gran Prix's with 2 bbl 400s. I've seen a ton of 2 bbl 350 Camaros, Chevelles and Monte Carlos. A few El Caminos with 2 bbl 400 small-blocks from the factory.   An Edelbrock Performer intake is about $200 for most engines through Jeg's or Summitt and a Holley or Edelbrock carb is about $400. Or it wouldn't be hard to chase down a factory 4 bbl carb and intake off the internet or at a swap meet for most GM , Ford and Chrysler applications. $600 and a couple hrs labor and you have a stunning improvement in performance and drivability. And no one in their right mind is going to say that a carb and intake hurt the value of the car!!  It's crazy but people snub these cars like the plague. I mean I've seen people buy automatics when they wanted a 4-speed, or buy something in a color they hate because it was otherwise a good deal. But a carb and intake? That's a deal breaker! Ugh! The one that killed me was the guy who wanted a '71-73 Mach 1 with two-tone red and black paint and graphics and two-tone red and black interior and Magnum 500 wheels. He finds a '72 Mach 1 with all of that in great shape-and then passes on it because the 351C had a 2 bbl!! He bought a gold '73 model with a 4 bbl that wasn't nearly as nice!!!  Another moron wanted a '70's Formula Firebird with T-tops and yellow and black graphics. He finds one in that exact color combination with T-Tops, and a 350 and a 4-speed!!-and passes on it in favor of gold hardtop 400 / TH350 model-because you guessed it-the 350 had a 2 bbl!!!  Like Ron White says "You can't fix stupid".  Anybody have an explanation for this?  I can't think that a carburator makes that much difference!!  Mastermind     

"Factory Freaks" aren't collectible.....their just weird......

It's Hot August Nights again and once again I occasionally run into people who think their weird car is something special. 99% of the time their not anything special they just have a weird collection of options.  I 've said it before and I'll say it again. Two speed automatics, three-speed sticks, two-barrel step-down engines, radio or heater delete cars, column-shifted bucket seat cars, stick shift bench seat cars, etc aren't collectible, their just weird. Even if the car really is one of one, most times their just weird. A perfect example-was featured in High Performance Pontiac magazine a few years back. I consider myself a pretty knowledgeable Pontiac historian and I didn't know that the automatic console shifter was an option on the Trans-Am, at least in the early years. So here's this guy who's all proud of his 1973 Trans-Am that has the shifter on the steering column. Ok. It wasn't an SD-455, it was a base model 250 hp version of which 4,550 others were built that year. He's going on and on in the article how he thinks it's the only T/A in existence with a column shifter and how neat it is. Ok, a '73 T/A with a 455 is a nice driver and has enough power that you don't have to take crap from little boys in their Hondas and Subarus. Cool. But the column shifter is not the mother of all rare options!!  I knew a guy in high school that had a'68 Firebird with the OHC 6-cylinder that had a 4-bbl carb and a was rated at 215 hp. Ok the OHC design was cool for 50 years ago and 215 hp will move a '68 Firebird briskly enough. Great. But their's a reason everyone wanted the 350 and 400 V8's. They have way more power and make it a musclecar instead of a commuter. If you have one of these OHC 6 Firebirds or can buy one cheap, ( provided you want one ) more power to you. But don't think it's worth more than a 400 4-speed model, or a Trans-Am. I knew another guy who had a '69 Gran Prix with a 428 and a 4-speed, of which 112 were built. I've also seen a '70 Monte Carlo with a 350 /4-speed combo, and I've seen a '71 with a 454 and a 4-speed. I spoke in a previous post about a guy who had a 427 Stingray with a Powerglide. He thinks it's worth a mint. Certainly any 427 Stingray has value, but he's acting like it's a numbers-matching L88!!  I've seen guys asking Judge and Hurst / Olds money for '67-68 "Turnpike Specials" GTOs and 442s-who in the hell wants a GTO or 442 with a 265 hp 2-bbl engine and a 2.93:1 rear end that can't outrun a V6 Honda Accord from a light???!!!!  I kid you not, these guys are asking more for these cars than some people are for RAIV or W30 cars!!  My personal favorite was the owner of the 305 powered 1980 Corvette that wanted an astronomical price for it.  If you run across some weirdo and the price is reasonable and you want it, by all means get it. But don't go out of your way or pay extra for one.  Mastermind 

"Fast&Furious" presents "Hobbes&Shaw"......a video game on-screen......

Saw "Hobbes&Shaw" last night. What a collossal waste of time. Sad thing is, since it's already grossed a gazillion dollars it'll probably spawn a sequel or two. Gag. retch, Puke. It doesn't start out bad. Vanessa Kirby plays Deckard Shaw's sister, an MI6 operative leading a team trying to retrieve a super-virus that an evil organization wants to use as a biological weapon. She shows quite a bit of athleticism and martial-arts ability in taking down the bad guys. However one of them-Brixton played with glee by Idris Elba is a bullet-proof cyborg with fantastic abilities-like the Terminator. She injects herself with the virus and escapes him and his henchman. The CIA and MI6 recruit Hobbes and Shaw to retrieve the virus and defeat Brixton. Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham have some good chemistry as they trade insults much like Nick Nolte and Eddie Murphy in the first "48 Hrs" or Bruce Willis and Damon Wayans in "The Last Boy Scout".  That's funny at times. Statham is a talented martial-artist and he kicks a lot of ass. Then it goes off the rails. They have to find a machine to extract the virus from Kirby in less than 48 hrs. As they try to do this and engage Brixton and his henchman it goes into grand theft auto on crack. I mean I'm willing to go the movies with a certain amount of "suspension of disbelief" but this was almost impossible to watch. Brixton has a motorcycle that comes to him like a horse, and can break down and slide under trucks and re-assemble itself??  The chase scenes with cars and motorcycles are insane. I mean there's no way the greatest stuntmen in the world could do this shit. It's obviously CGI. I mean their not doing it, we know their not doing it, so why put it on-screen?  Hobbes and Shaw get captured and tortured by Brixton and he offers them a job with his organization that wants to dominate the world by using the virus to eliminate sick and weak people. Their rescued by Kirby in a scene that sets up a plot hole the size of alpha-centauri. She trys to shoot Brixton with a gun stolen from one of his henchman and it doesn't fire because she doesn't have the glove on that has the code that electronically controls all their guns. They escape anyway, with the glove and the machine that can extract the virus in yet another totally implausible chase scene. The machine gets broken and KIrby implores them to shoot her before the virus kills them all. Here Hobbes decides to take them to Samoa where he's from and his genius estranged brother can fix the machine. Hobbe's brothers are kind of Samoan "Dukes of Hazzards" good ole boys operating on the edge of the law that build custom hot rods. Here's where the huge plot hole hits. Hobbe's mother has gotten rid of their arsenal of weapons and all they have now is clubs and swords and old Samoan weapons. Hobbes and Shaw and his crew decide to engage Brixton this way. When Brixton and his heavily armed Commandos arrive, he tells the boys to annihilate Hobbes and his men. But wait!  Their automatic weapons won't fire because Kirby has disabled them via computer!!  Rats!!  At this point I'm thinking why would a SPECTRE like organization with zillions of dollars have weapons that could be disabled by a hacker?  I'm also thinking why didn't they bring regular Smith&Wesson, Colt, Ruger, Beretta or whatever guns that simply fire when you pull the trigger??!!!!  This plot hole-like I said that you could drive fifty trucks through-ruined it for me. Hobbes and Shaw and company kick the hell out of Brixtons now unarmed men and he trys to escape via helicopter. Here we go again like F&F 6-their going to bring down an aircraft with cars. UGH!  The Rock throws a chain over the wing of the helicopter and Statham drives the tow truck that gives chase. Hobbe's brothers hook other trucks to it to add weight to keep the bird from lifting off.  I know  he's a big, buff guy-but were supposed to believe that when the chain breaks, the Rock is strong enough to catch it, and hang onto a 30,000 lb helicopter trying to pull away under full power and pull it back in and re-attach it to the winch???!!!!  Puhleeze. Then of course the helicopter and the trucks go off a big cliff and crash, and of course Johnson and Statham emerge without a scratch to have a brutal fight to the finish with Brixton.  Brixton's organization "Shuts him down" when they see he's about to lose and threatens Hobbes and Shaw-obviously leaving room for a sequel-which they try to set up in an after credits scene with Ryan Reynolds. I like action flicks-Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Casino Royale ( with Daniel Craig ) Homefront ( with Jason Statham ) ,Last Man Standing ( with Bruce Willis and Christopher Walken ) are all among my favorites. Even early Steven Seagal flicks like Above the Law and Hard to Kill or Jean-Claude Van Damme stuff like Hard Target or Timecop are fun to watch, because the action is at least possible.  But when your just putting stuff on screen that even a 12 year old is going-"You can't do that"  you know you've gone too far. I wish they'd invest a little time in writing a decent story instead of just spending millions on special effects.  As long as people line up in droves to see this dreck, they'll keep on making it. I only went because my 15 year old nephew asked me to take him. And he said it was too over the top to be believable.  Mastermind     

"Lukewarm" August Nights....

Hot August Nights is here again and once again I'm disappointed. I know I sound like a broken record the last few years, but the organizers have got to get their act together or this cash cow is going to wither and die. Up until a few years ago it was really cool. You got great entertainment-People like Jerry Lee Lewis, the Righteous Brothers, Fats Domino,Chubby Checker,Little Richard, John Kay of Steppenwolf. You'd get Paul Revere and the Raiders, Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, The Guess Who, Herman's Hermits, Davy Jones.  I realize some of these people have died or retired, but the organizers make no effort to replace them. '70's Bands like REO Speedwagon, Journey, Credence Clearwater Revisited, Def Leppard, Three Dog Night, etc are still touring. Music snobs can gripe that they don't have all the original members-but their still professional musicians that play music people want to hear and put on a great live show.  Nope. We don't even get recognizable local bands Like-"Rain" who were awesome Beatle Impersonators.  The big casinos have "Show-n-Shines", but I remember when you'd see thousands of cars driving around. Not anymore. They must all be "Trailer Queens".  And the sad thing is you dont see the really cool stuff anymore. No Superbirds, no Thunderbolt Fairlanes, no Hemi Darts. The GM section is all Camaros, Chevelles, GTOs and Firebirds. No 442s or Rallye 350s,or W31 Cutlasses, no Super Duty Catalinas, or 2+2's, no Buick GSX's or even Rivieras, no 409 Impalas, very few Corvettes. The Ford section is all Mustangs. A few Shelbys, a few Boss 302s. a few '55-57 T-Birds. No Torinos, no Cougars, no Montegos, or Cyclones, no 427 Galaxies, no Boss 429s.  Mopars are all Chargers, Road Runners and Challengers. No Max Wedge cars, no '50's Hemi 300s, very few GTX's and Super Bees. Hell, I'd jump for joy if I saw a 340 Demon!!!  And 1/16 mile drag races???!!!!  330 feet?? In a Casino Parking lot!! Most of the big-block cars can smoke the tires that far!!!!  Cheap bastards that own the casinos won't spring to rent either Reno-Fernley Raceway or Top Gun Raceway both of which have full-service, real 1/4 mile dragstrips!!!   Ugh!!  Come on guys, get with it. Mastermind

More on "gotta haves" you don't need......

In a previous post I talked about the original Shelby Cobra and several other swaps that were popular in the '70's and '80's when i was young. A longtime reader inquired about the safety aspect of such swaps and how they affected weight distribution and braking and handling. I answered him, but after thinking more about it, I thought it merited a full examination. This guy raised very valid points. If you've driven a pre '67 GTO or SS396 Chevelle ( with 9.5 inch drum brakes at all 4 corners ) you know what a hairy ride is!!  Or a late '60's Mopar with a 440 and drum brakes. They'll stop from 100 mph plus one time. Multiple times-they fade so bad that it's scary. Well the engine swaps I was talking about worked better than that. The 350 Chevy / 240 / 260 / 280Z swap is a great one. A small-block Chevy only weighs 20 pounds more than the Datsun 6 it replaces, so their is no effect on weight distribution. With their short wheelbase and independent suspension they are great drag racers. They get surprisingly good traction. You can smoke the tires if you want, but they squat and go!!  The one I built used a TH350; other guys have used Muncie and T10 4-speeds and T5 5-speeds. Even dropping the clutch at 3,500-4,000 rpm these guys never broke the rear end. A couple got kicked off their local tracks because they ran faster than 12.0 ( 11.50 on some tracks ) without a driveshaft safety loop or 8 point roll cage. As for braking the "Z" car had front disc brakes from the factory, and although the power level was almost doubled-the car weighed the same and the weight distribution was the same, so they stopped fine, even in back to back to back runs at the drags.  The same for the SPL 311. The all-aluminum 215 inch Buick V8 was actually lighter than the 4-banger it replaced, ( they only weigh 324 lbs ) and setting the engine back a couple inches actually improved handling. We had to shorten the driveshaft, but that was easily done by a driveline shop. And again-the SPL311 had front disc brakes stock, and worked just fine. The car only weighed 2,300 lbs, so the front disc / rear drum brakes were more than adequate regardless of power level; which was about 225 hp-about double what the 4-banger had. ( The 215 was rated at 185 hp stock; ours had headers and an Offenhauser intake and 600 cfm Holley carb ).  In no way was the chassis or brake system overloaded. My dad had a 4.33:1 geared '64 GTO with 9.5 inch drum brakes. I remember some hairy rides wondering if that sob was going to stop before we went off the road or hit something!!  A ladyfriend had a 289 Pinto that was really quick. I did break the rear axle on my V8 Vega; but a V8 Monza rear end solved that problem. And both the Vega and Pinto had front disc brakes.  Another guy I knew put a 289 Ford into a Fiat 124 Spyder back in the early '90's. That was a fun car!!  The 289 didn't weigh much more than the 4-banger it replaced, and the 124 had 4-wheel disc brakes from the factory. He showed his taillights to many a shocked "5.0" Mustang owner!  I do agree with my colleague that just stuffing a big engine in a little car is not always a good idea. A friend had a Cobra replica with a blown 454 Chevy. It was ungodly fast-it ran something like 9.90 in the 1/4. It also overheated if it idled more than two minutes, you had to crane your neck to the left to see around the blower, and about every 5th run it would spit a half-shaft out the Jag rear end and have to be towed home. Stuff like that I'd stay away from.  But getting back to engine swapping and hot rodding. Summitt Racing sells brand-new T10 4-speeds with different ratios. They list the torque ratings from 300 to 375 lbs ft of torque. I'm laughing out loud. Pontiac used the T10 behind the Super Duty 421. Motor Trend estimated that the engine had 465 hp and 505 lbs of torque-quite a bit more than it's 405 hp rating. The 1965 2+2 tri-power 421 was rated at 376 hp and 459 lbs of torque. People drag raced these cars and rarely broke the transmissions!! These trannys were also used behind 409 Chevys and 406 Fords which had 450+lbs ft of torque. And the new trannys have much harder gears and mainshafts ( because of modern metallurgy ) than the T10s of 1963!! So a 300-375 lb torque rating is laughable. Would I put one behind a 720 hp 572? Probably not. But I wouldn't have a problem using one in 400 or 455 Firebird or GTO or a 396 / 454 Chevelle, or 390 / 428 Mustang.  The T5 only has a 280 lb ft torque rating. Yet I know guys who swapped their 305 Chevys for stompin' 350s and 383s in their '80's Camaros and have no problems. I know "5.0" Mustang racers that run in the 10s and 11s with stock T5s!!  The Camaro guys who are making due with the T5s are also running these cars with the "weak" 7.5 inch rear end that '80's "F" and "G" bodies have!!  Again-I wouldn't swap in an LS6 454, without upgrading the rear axle, but these "weak sisters" seem to do fine behind hotted-up 350s!!  See what I'm saying?  I mentioned in a previous post that "experts" will tell you if your building a small-block Chevy that you "Gotta have" a 4-bolt main block, a forged crank, "pink" rods, forged pistons, and screw-in studs in the heads. If your building a NASCAR Nextel Cup engine that has to go 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona!!  If your building a street / strip machine or even a short-track racer-2 bolt main blocks and a cast crank and cast pistons are fine!!  I would only recommend forged pistons if you were going to run a blower or nitrous. And then my question is if you have that much money and need to go that fast, why aren't you building a 454 instead of a 350?  I applaud my reader for thinking about safety when attempting major modifications on a car; however sometimes I think the buff magazines influence people too much. I've said it before and I'll say it again-the magazines have to sell their advertiser's products to stay in business. Rest assured every single project car doesn't  "NEED" a custom Currie built 9 inch Ford rear and a Wildwood or Brembo 4-wheel disc brake system worthy of a Formula 1 car.  I have a friend who ran a '70's Camaro in Street Stock and Super Stock circle track classes for years. I have seen him run an 8 lap heat race,a 20 lap semi, and a 50 lap main event back to back to back on a 1/4 mile track, and the stock brake system never faded, even with the rotors glowing red. All we had to do was use Police-Spec Metallic Pads and Dot 5 fluid. Yet Hot Rod's "Project Disco" ( a '79 Z/28 ) HAD to have a Wildwood 4-wheel disc setup!!  For daily driving and a weekend trip to the drags??    Anyhow all I'm saying is any and all reader input is greatly appreciated even if you don't always agree with me. That's what an open forum is all about right?  So take "Gotta Haves" with a grain of salt and keep building your cars, and feel free to chime in anytime. Mastermind     

What about some Trans-Am tributes?......( Racing series )

The Trans-Am racing series was originally called the Trans-American Sedan Racing Championship, which was then shortened to "Trans-Am".  The top class limited displacement to 5 liters ( 305 CID ). Camaros, Firebirds, and Mustangs have been done to death, as have Chrysler E-bodies-Challengers & 'Cudas.  I was thinking about some other bodystyles that would be cool done in Trans-Am style i.e.-radiused and flared fenderwells, side-exit exhaust, etc.  # 1. 1968-74 Chevy Nova / 1971-74 Pontiac Ventura.  The GM "X" bodies have enormous potential. Any suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Camaro / Firebird fit these cars and their engine bays will swallow any GM engine-small or big-block Chevy, 455 Pontiac or Olds, anything.  I see a Ventura with WS6 T/A front and rear sway bars, fat tires under flared fenders and a stompin' 455 with aluminum heads.  Or a Nova with a high-winding 350.  # 2. 1967-73 Mercury Cougar. A high-winding 302 or 351C backed by a Tremec five speed, radiused fenders, Minilite wheels and fat tires, side exit exhaust....A T/A themed Cougar would be way cool.  # 3. 1968-76 Dodge Dart / Plymouth Duster. A 360 Magnum under the hood of these lightweight sedans should provide good motivation. Or you could go hog-wild and swap in a 440....# 4. 1970-77 Ford Maverick / Mercury Comet. Weighing less than 3,000 lbs these "Rodney Dangerfields" could kick some serious butt with a 302 and a five-speed. Maybe with a Ford Racing or Magnussen blower.... Some others that might be more Nascar-ish but could still be cool would include.....# 5. 1969-76 Pontiac Gran Prix. 400 cubes standard all years with 455 optional. Wrist-thick front and rear sway bars and fenderwells that will accomodate 275 / 60 R15 tires on 8 inch wheels without modification make these a natural.  # 6. 1970-77 Chevy Monte Carlo. The only reason these rank less than their Pontiac cousins is most are small-block powered. Rat motored models can be pricey. However there's more speed equipment for a Small-Block Chevy than anything else on the planet, and any suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Chevelle fit these.  # 7. 1972-76 Mercury Montego / Ford Torino / 1974-76 Cougar. David Pearson won a ton of races in the Wood Brothers Montego in the '70's. His duels with Richard Petty are legendary. 351C or 429 models would be the most desirable, but if you had to you could make a 351 / 400M run.  # 8. 1971-74 AMC Javelin / AMX. Since these cars were the champ for a couple years in the early '70's they need to be on the list. The downside is their pretty rare and AMC collectors fight with machetes for them, although not as much as the 1968-70 models. If you find one at a reasonable price by all means buy it, but I wouldn't hold my breath. The upside is the 360 V8 was used in Jeep Grand Wagoneers through 1993 so their fairly plentiful in junkyards, and Edelbrock makes heads and intakes and cams for them.  Mastermind 

Where are all the "Shelby" type guys?......

When Carroll Shelby stuffed a 260 / 289 Ford V8 into the AC Ace he created a high-performance legend-the original Cobra. Cobras dominated every race they entered whether it was on a road course or a drag strip. The Cobras success caused Zora-Arkus Duntov to push Corvette development. Others tried stuff like this. A friend of my dad's had an Austin Healey with a 327 Chevy stuffed in it. The buff magazines called this swap the "Poor man's Cobra".  Through the '70's my friends and I built cool stuff, with some help from the buff magazines and companies like Hooker. My dad and I built a V8 Vega when I was in high school. A girl I knew had a V8 Pinto.  Another friend put a 350 into a Chevy LUV pickup. That truck was brutally quick since the LUV had something like 4.33:1 gears in the rear end.  My dad and I put a 350 Chevy into a Datsun 240Z. My cousin had a Datsun SPL311 with a 215 inch Buick V8 and a Muncie 4-speed. Guys were always fooling around with stuff like that and the cars were always great fun to drive and really fast. I guess maybe newer cars have just too much electronic nannies to mess with. I mean you don't see someone putting a small-block Chevy into a Saturn Sky or a 5.0 Ford into a Miata.  Maybe they just plain won't fit-I don't know anyone who has tried. Once in a while you'll see a small-block Chevy in an S10 pickup.  I saw a Pontiac Fiero that had a supercharged 3.8 V6 and transaxle in it's mid-engine compartment. It was undgodly fast. I think we need more of these projects. I'll do some research and see if their feasible. Maybe we can do a "Project Junkyard Dog" and put a Supercharged 3.8 out of a Riviera in an '80's Firebird, or a Supercharged 3.8 Ford out of a wrecked T-Bird into a '90's Mustang. How about a Dodge Dakota with a 360 Magnum stroked to 410 inches?  Any one else have any suggestions?  Mastermind