More tips from the vault of vast experience...

Here's some more tidbits I've learned over the years that may save people some money or grief when restoring a car.  # 1. I don't like Holley carbs. Other people have had great success with them, but in 40 years I have never had much luck with Holleys. The power valves blow,the floats sink, they bleed over. The double-pumpers get horrible mileage even by musclecar standards. When I bought a ZZ4 GMPP crate engine a few years ago it came with a brand new 770 cfm Holley Avenger carb, supposed calibrated specifically for the ZZ4 by GM and Holley. It worked for about three weeks. Then the car became very hard to start when hot. I would have to crank and crank the engine to get it to start. Thank God I had a strong battery and starter! It also developed a stumble at low-speeds. I replaced it with a Jet Performance Quadrajet and the car ran flawlessly and started easy cold or hot. I've had this experience on many cars owned by me, or my friends or my customers. I have had great luck with Carter AFB's, with Edelbrock Performers, with Quadrajets, with Carter Thermo-Quads, and Demons. I'm not disparaging Holley Products-I'm just saying that I personally never had much luck with them. That's why I always recommend Edelbrock carbs-I've never had a problem with one of them.  # 2. I don't like Champion Spark Plugs. I've had great luck with AC, Autolite, and NGK plugs in domestic and import cars and motorcycles over the years. Champions seem to foul a lot. And it doesn't matter how rich or lean the carb is. I've had people with cars and bikes that ran horrible. Swapped the Champion plugs for Autolites or NGKs-ran like a champ. Again-other people swear by Champions. I swear at them. Just my experience. # 3. Don't use Auto Parts store Ignition components. I don't care if it's Autozone, Pep Boys, Napa or whatever-these "house brand" points don't work. They will close up, they'll bounce over 4,000 rpm won't hold a dwell setting. The rotors burn up, the caps arc between cylinders, the stuff is terrible. If your running a point-type distributor use Genuine AC-Delco points, condenser, rotor and cap on GM stuff, Motorcraft stuff on Fords and Mopar Performance stuff on Chryslers. Or use Accel, Mallory, or MSD parts. These premium brands have brass contacts instead of potmetal or aluminum, and the plastic is higher grade. Ditto for wires. The house brand wires break, they jump fire between cylinders, cause static in your radio, etc.  If your not using Delco, Motorcraft, or Mopar wires then use Borg-Warner, Accel, MSD, or Mallory. You'll get much better performance and reliability with the premium components. # 4. Use Hooker or Hedman or Doug Thorely Headers. These three brands have given me many years of trouble-free performance on various vehichles. Whenever I had a customer with major exhaust leaks, warped or cracked headers or constantly blowing exhaust gaskets, they invariably had some "off brand" of headers like Blackjack, Flow Tech, etc. When they switched to Hooker or Hedman, no more problems. They use a higher grade of steel to start with, their machining is better, their contact surfaces are straighter. If your going to put headers on your car-spend the 300 or so bucks for these. The $129 specials will give you nothing but grief-ill-fitting, leaking, cracking, etc.  #5. Don't use "House Brand" cams. I have never had a problem with Crane, Lunati, or Edelbrock Cams. People who have bought Summit cams, Chet Herbert cams, Howards cams, etc-have had them go flat in less than 3,000 miles, backfire through the carburator etc. Stick with the name brands. They flat work. Crane and Lunati offer exact replicas of classic musclecar cams both solid and hydraulic if you want to go that route. They also have some that are computer optimized and actually make more power and torque and retain good idle quality. Think-do you want a 1964 camshaft profile or a 2016 one?  Anyhow-I'm not disparaging certain products, I'm just stating what I've had good and bad luck with. And hopefully that will save people some money and hassle. Mastermind  

In 40+ years of experience you learn some things....

A lot of people ask me why I often contradict articles written in the buff magazines, or that I blithely poo-poo some "Experts" advice on what you "Gotta Have".  Here's why. My dad was a gearhead and restored and raced cars for many years. My mother says-not joking-that I could swap valvesprings in a small-block Chevy cylinder head before I could ride a two-wheel bike!  I worked in car dealers and independent shops for 38 years, and my friends and I drag-raced cars, ran "Street Stock", "Hobby Stock" and "Super Stock" cars on circle tracks for 20+ years. You learn quite a bit from your own experiences, and from talking to other people about theirs. That's why I'm confident, and yes I'll admit-sometimes even arrogant about my opinions. Anyhow-today I'll play "Mythbuster", and tell you why you don't need many of the "Gotta Haves" that you read about in the buff magazines.  # 1. Drivetrain and Suspension / Brake Upgrades. Have you noticed that every single magazine project car of late has a custom Currie-built 9 inch Ford rear end, a Richmond or Tremec 5 or 6-speed stick, or a beefed up 700R4 or 4L80E overdrive automatic and a Wildwood 4-wheel disc brake setup worthy of a NASCAR Nextel Cup car?  I'm all for safety and reliability, but honestly-let's take a look at Hot Rod's "Project Disco"-a 1978 Z/28 Camaro. First off the name implies that they were going to do a late '70's style project. Which would have been cool, with flared fenders, Minilite Wheels, and a snarling small or big-block Chevy. No-like all the mags-they should change their name to "Modern Fuelie Swap Monthly"-they put an LS3 and a six-speed in it!!  That's not very "Disco-era" at all!!  However-even choosing the modern LS motor-they spent a ton of money they didn't need to. '78 Z/28's had either a BW T10 4-speed manual or a TH350 automatic as standard equipment. Either one would have bolted up to the LS engine, and worked just fine. They didn't need to spend an extra 3 grand on the six-speed conversion. For what? To reduce freeway crusing rpm by 500 rpm?  Ditto for the rear axle. '78 Z/28's have an 8.5 inch ring gear positraction rear end with either 3.42:1 or 3.73:1 gears. Perfect for a street / strip machine. And their tough. I've had 400 and 455, 4-speed Trans-Ams with this rear end, and popped the clutch at 4,000 rpm many times drag racing or just screwing around and never broke the rear end. As for the brakes-are they saying that the factory front disc / rear drum setup isn't adequate to stop the car safely in daily driving or on a weekend trip to the drags? I have a friend who Autocrossed a '76 T/A ( They use the same braking system as the Camaro ) very successfully with the stock brakes. He figured out that if he used Bendix or Ferodo Police-Spec Semi-Metallic D52 pads and Dot 5 fluid, that the brakes would not fade, even after back to back to back runs!!  In fact-the main problem was the Dot 3 fluid boiling and causing a mushy pedal. With the Dot 5 fluid-everything was peachy. Same thing for a Circle-Track racer who had a '70's Camaro front clip on his "Super Stock" champion car that ran on 1/4 mile and 1/2 mile tracks. Even on a 50 lap main event on a 1/4 mile track-his stock braking system never faded-if he used Dot 5 fluid and the Police-Spec pads!!  So this project car in no way "needed" the additonal 10 grand that they spent on the Currie 9 inch rear,Wildwood 4-wheel disc setup and six-speed conversion!! They do that stuff to sell their advertisers products. They have to to stay in business. But honestly-I have never seen anyone break a Chrysler 8 3/4 inch rear, ( Even with a 505 stroker with nitrous in a 9 second Duster! ) or an 8.5 Gm 10 Bolt. Does that extra 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch on the ring gear really make that much difference?  I guess if you were running a 720 hp GMPP 572 with a stick or a TH400 with a 5,000 rpm converter and a trans-brake and wrinklewall slicks bolted to the rims, it might. But for the other 99% of you-you probably don't NEED a Dana 60 or a custom 9 inch rear!!!  Same thing for transmissions. Unless you have over 500 hp-a TH350 or a C4 will work fine with a shift kit and the proper cooler. You don't "Gotta Have" a TH400 or a C6. Some of the newer T10s advertised in Summitt may only show a 375 lb torque rating. Puhleeze. GM used the T10 ( the design has never changed, only the metallurgy of the gears and the modern ones are a lot stronger than the old ones ) behind Super Duty 421 Pontiacs and 409 Chevys-that easily had over 500 lbs ft of torque!!  The T5 BW 5-speeds used in '80's Camaros and Mustangs supposedly only have a 300 lb torque rating. I know a guy that swapped in a STRONG 350, and it lasted 13 months with him going to the drags every weekend and powershifting through probably 30 hard passes a week! If he'd drove the car normally ir probably would have lasted 5 years!  I know Mustang racers with nitrous that run 10s and have never blown their T5. I wouldn't put one behind a 454 or a 392 stroker, but you get the gist. You don't need to upgrade your tranny on your 302 'Stang or 305 IROC-Z because you installed an Edelbrock intake and matching cam!!  # 2. Bottom-end and Valvetrain Beef.  "You gotta have a 4-bolt main block" "You gotta have a forged crank." "You gotta have screw-in studs" "You gotta have forged pistons" and so on. These "Experts" are half-right. If your building a NASCAR engine that has to go 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona, yes you need all the beef you can get. But for a STREET engine, that will never see the high side of 6,500 rpm, and only maybe get the occasional weekend trip to the drags-you don't need all that stuff. Save your money for cams, headers, carb and intake, gears, etc-stuff that really gives you "bang for the buck". Here's why. People don't know-it's not load or rpm that breaks things. It's SUSTAINED load. That's why through the '70's and '80's GM medium and heavy-duty trucks with 350 Chevys in them always had 4-bolt mains and steel cranks, even though Camaros and Corvettes often had 2-bolt main blocks and cast cranks. Huh? The reason is the trucks were going to be constantly loaded and or towing heavy loads which put much more strain on the crank than the occasional full-throttle blast of the Camaro and Corvette owner. Ford NEVER had a forged crank for 351 Cleveland engines. And neither did the aftermarket. Yet drag racers like "Dyno Don" Nicholson and Bob Glidden ran 9 second 1/4s in Pro Stock, often shifitng at 8,000 rpm with stock 351C cranks!! Bud Moore and Bobby Isaac campaigned a 351C Torino in NASCAR with a stock crank. They were that tough. As for rods-most people don't know it-about 97% of rod failure-even in racing engines occurs AT THE BOLT. So if your rebuilding an engine-you don't need an ultra-expensive set of Eagle or Milodon forged rods. A set of chrome-moly rod bolts is good insurance. Even on supposedly "weak" factory rods. Pontiac rods ( Except for forged Super Duty's ) have a reputation for being "weak". However my friends and relatives have had numerous GTOs and Firebirds and Ventura project cars over the years-many which ran in the 11s or 12s-so they had SERIOUS power-and as long rpms were limited to 6,400 on a 400 or 5,800 on a 455-we never had a rod failure!!  Ditto for forged pistons. Their noisy, and they require loose clearances ( they expand when hot ) so they use some oil. Cast pistons run quiet and are dead-reliable. I'd recommend forged pistons only if you going to run a blower or nitrous. And to that I'd ask-if you have that much money and need to go that fast-then why aren't you building a 454 instead of a 350? Or a 440 instead of a 360? Or whatever-you get the point. As for valvetrain-people will tell you you have to have screw-in studs, or roller rockers, or chrome-moly pushrods, or a stud girdle, or whatever. Again-if your buidling that NASCAR engine, yes. A street / strip machine or even a short-track racer?  No. I know guys who have ran small-block Chevy and Ford engines in circle-track racing classes for years with two-bolt main blocks, cast cranks and pistons and stock heads and have run the engines two whole seasons without a problem. And these engines are under much more sustained load than your street car will ever be. As for failures-I've seen broken valve springs, broken pushrods, broken rocker arms, and jumped timing chains. But in 40 years I have NEVER seen a stud pull out of a head!!  So before you spend your hard-earned money on a bunch of beef and machine work that you don't really need, talk to some of us old guys. We might be able to save you big bucks. Mastermind
           

Make sure everything's right before you start throwing parts at it....

A lot of people ask me how to get the most performance out of a certain car for a certain budget,and they always ask-what should I buy first? Gears? Headers? A carb and intake? One thing they forget is to make sure the car is in top operating condition BEFORE you start modifying it. Here's a list of important things that many people don't check. # 1. Do a simple compression test. Even an 8:1 "smog" motor will have 120-130 psi of compression. Higher performance engines will have 150 psi or more. The main thing is the readings should be uniform for all 8 cylinders-within 5-10 psi of each other. If one or more cylinders only has 80 or 90 psi-you could have a serious problem like burned valves, bad rings or a blown head gasket. You'd be amazed at the number of cars I see limping around on 6 or 7 cylinders.  # 2. No high rpm power. I'm not talking about 7,000 or 8,000 rpm; many cars don't have the valvetrain or bottom-end for that. But a 318 Dodge with a 2bbl and 150,000 miles on it will rev to 5,000 rpm or so. If the car starts missing or popping above 3,500-4,000 rpm, you could have a flat cam or excessive timing chain slop. You'd be amazed at the number of cars I see with $5,000 paint jobs and $2,000 worth of tires and wheels that can't pull 5,000 rpm in low gear. # 3. Bad Ignition. This one is probably the most prevalant. I see cars all the time where the vacuum advance is unplugged or inoperable, the timing is way too slow or way too advanced, the points are closing up, it has one or more bad wires, a cracked distributor cap, etc. Again-you see cars with $5,000 paint jobs sputtering around and the owner can't tell you the last time-if ever-he changed the points,plugs, and cap, rotor and wires!!  # 4. Bad or improperly adjusted carb(s). I see cars all the time where the throttle linkage doesn't open fully, the kickdown cable isn't hooked up,the throttle shafts are warped, the float is sinking, their jetted way too rich or way too lean, theirs vacuum leaks everywhere. It's worse on Tri-Power Pontiacs, Six-Pack Mopars, 409 Impalas, Hemi Chryslers, and other multi-carb vehicles I may have missed. Their so afraid of blowing it up that they drive it like grandma on Prozac. It never sees the high side of 3,000 rpm, and usually is only driven on and off the trailer. Then, the second it fouls a spark plug, the owner starts screwing around with the carburators. Pretty soon it won't even start. Here's how to avoid this. Put your 50 year old, numbers-matching carb in a box in case you ever want to sell the car or re-install it for a Concours show. New Holley or Edelbrock 4bbls work pretty damn good out of the box on 99% of applications. If you have a multi-carb setup-take it to a shop that has an infrared anaylyzer and a carb synchronizer and have them re-jet or adjust the carbs properly and then leave them alone!!  If your going to drive it like grandma, then go a range or two hotter on the plugs. If you decide to take a road trip or go to the drags, changing back to the colder heat range plugs for high-speed driving is pretty easy. And like the GTO song-once in a while you need to "Turn it on, wind it up, blow it out". I'm not saying run your Hemi 'Cuda to 7 grand and risk putting a picture window in the side of the block; But running it up to say 4,500 rpm through the gears occasionally or a full-throttle blast up a freeway on-ramp once in a while will go a long way towards keeping it running properly for when you DO want to put the hammer down. # 5. Bad transmissions. You'd be amazed at the number of cars I see with slipping or chattering clutches, shift linkages that bind up, automatics that are 2 qts low on fluid, or the fluid looks like mud, the vacuum modulator is unplugged or inoperable, etc. If you have a stick make sure the linkage works properly and that the clutch isn't slipping and is adjusted properly. Hurst has a rebuild program where you can send in your factory shifter and they'll re-furbish it with new bushings, shift rods, etc. If you have an automatic-make sure the fluid is clean and full. Make sure the vacuum modulator is working properly and that the kickdown linkage is hooked up properly. A B&M or TransGo shift improver kit is pretty simple to install and will greatly improve shift quality and performance. Making sure these simple things are right can make a huge difference in preformance. A shop I worked at had a dyno and we offered performance dyno tuning. Even on a bone-stock engine, bad tuning can cost you as much as 50 hp!  So before you go plunk down your credit card for a cam kit, or headers or a carb / intake combo or a high-stall converter or whatever-make sure the car is in top running condition to begin with. A hot cam isn't going to help if you've got a blown head gasket!  Mastermind    

You may not always like what I say....But it'll be the truth!!

Had some people upset with my review of  "John Wick Chapter 2" and my bagging on "Gator"-the "White Lightning" follow-up. What did you want me to do, lie and say I liked them?  Both the "John Wick" movies had plot holes you could drive a semi through. And I am sick of CGI. Guy jumps six feet in the air, rotates his body clockwise, kicks 3 guys in the face, does a backflip and lands on his feet. It can't be done, we know it can't be done, we know the actor isn't doing it, so why put it on screen?  Is the target audience 13 year old boys?  At least if Chuck Norris or Jean-Claude Van Damme, or Jackie Chan, did something even if it looked inelegant-you knew you had an actor / athlete doing something 99% of the rest of the population couldn't do. Classics like "Bullitt" and the "Seven-Ups" and the "French Connection" are still watchable today because you had brave stuntmen and actors- ( Steve McQueen and Gene Hackman did some of the stunt driving in "Bullitt" and the "French Connection" ) doing great things with great cars. Unlike the CGI dreck of the "Transporter" movies and the later "F&F" movies. ( The 4th one was the last one that had any remotely believable or do-able stunts. Like putting lead in the rear bumper of Vin Diesel's Chevelle to make it wheelie )  Anyhow-"White Lightning" was a good movie. "Gator" wasn't.  "Smokey and the Bandit" was a cute and funny, light-hearted car-chase comedy.  The second "Bandit" was awful-with the pregnant elephant and Jackie Gleason's Buford T. Justice having triplett brothers,-ugh!!  The Original "Death Wish" was a compelling commentary on crime in society, and one man's 180 degree reversal of his beliefs after his family's tragic attack. Bronson should have got an Oscar.  Bronson was also great in the original "Mechanic" and in the Elmore Leonard penned "Mr. Majestyk". The multiple "Death Wish" sequels that he phoned in in the '80's and '90's were terrible, even by mindless action-movie standards. If something's good I'll say it, and If something's bad, I'll say it. And you can have good and bad things in the same film. For example I liked "The Driver" with Ryan O' Neal and Bruce Dern for the most part. Except for the finale. O' Neal is driving a 2wd, stick-shift ( those '70's trucks were so awful to shift with those "granny" transmissions ) '76 Chevy Pickup. The guy he's chasing is driving a '76 Trans-Am. If the truck was a 454 / TH400 a drag race would have been competitive, but going around corners over city streets?  The T /A would leave him in 2 blocks!!  Ironically-earlier in the film, O 'Neal was driving a '77 Firebird!!  Now if he was chasing the T/A in that, it would have been believable!!  And as for the women in "White Lightning" and "Gator"-like I said-Jennifer Billingsley was sexy as hell and played her part perfectly. Lauren Hutton was as wooden as she always was, and at the time the movie was made-Burt Reynolds was 40 and she was 33. Both too old for the '70's "meet cute" "I hate you, now I love you" bullshit that was popular in the late '70's / early '80's. And her "Plucky Girl Reporter" schtick made me think-"Nancy Fuckin' Drew"-at 35!!  ( If you don't know Nancy Drew was a teenage-girl detective in several young adult books and a TV series starring a pre-Dynasty Pamela Sue Martin ). Anyhow-her New York TV Station bound city girl would have thought Gator was coarse and a hick, and Gator would have thought her stuck-up and longed for another roll in the hay with the barefoot "Shake a Puddin"!!  I just couldn't care if they had sex or not!!  And they could have really dug into "Bama McCall's" character-which they didn't. And the crazy lady with the cats?  Whose Idea was that?  Anyhow-hopefully the next flick with musclecars in it will be better written and directed. And I'll tell you honestly if it is, or if it isn't!!  Mastermind  

"Gator" just doesn't cut the mustard...

There's talk of Quentin Tarantino doing a remake of "White Lightning." I gave my opinion on that in a previous post, and a lot of people consider "White Lighning" not only a great action film and a "cult classic" but perhaps Burt Reynolds' best work besides "Deliverance."  I agree. "Lightning" was a lean, mean revenge thriller with a great cast and great action. It opens with "Gator" being visited in prison by his cousin, telling him that his college-student younger brother has been murdered in Bogen county and that they think the corrupt sheriff was involved. After a botched escape attempt, Gator cuts a deal with the feds to get the Sheriiff on income-tax evasion and bribery charges in exchange for getting out of prison. Burt was at the top of his game-this was when he still acted-before "The Longest Yard" and "Smokey and the Bandit" and "Cannonball Run" where he began phoning in his "Good Ol' Boy" persona in lighweight comedies. Ned Beatty-was awesome as the Corrupt Sheriff Connors-his scary performance rivaling Strother Martin's in "Cool Hand Luke". ( "What we have here is a failure to communicate." ) Since he was the meek businessman raped in "Deliverance" his portrayal of an evil, sadistic southern badass shows exceptional range as an actor. Bo Hopkins and R.G. Armstrong were excellent as corrupt moonshiner's, as was Matt Clark as a tragic government informant who reluctantly helps Gator. Jennifer Billingsley just oozed sex as "Shake a Puddin'"-her dark brown roots showing in her bleach-blond hair, barefoot in that skimpy mini-sundress for most of the movie, nailing the southern slut that men die and kill for. Others have tried it-Kim Basinger in "No Mercy", Teri Hatcher in "Heaven's Prisoner's" and most recently Reese Witherspoon in "Mud", but none come close to Jennifer's performance. Anyhow-Matt Clark's advice to Gator early on plays out. "If you want to get that Sheriff, your gonna have to kill him." "Gator" opens after the events of "White Lighning", with Gator out of prison and living in a Swamp with his father and teenage daughter. Ok-here's a cutesy twist- and a big plot hole that just doesn't fly. In the first film, there's no mention of Gator having any kids. He visited his mother and father on a large family farm. His dad-who had apprently retired from making illegal moonshine and was living happily on this farm, was angry at Gator for working for the Feds and refused to speak to him further after finding out he was turning "liquor people" over to the Feds. His mother was sad, and didn't want him to get killed like his brother. So what happened to his mother? There's no mention of her dying or leaving the old man. And what happened to the family farm? There's no mention of it being lost to foreclosure or back taxes. And where did this teenage kid come from? There's no mention of her mother, ever. So the Feds tell Gator they'll throw him back in Jail and take his kid away unless he helps nail "Bama Mc Call"-a gangster who runs drugs and prostitution and extortion all over the State of Georgia. Why Georgia? "Gator" was set in Arkansas. Jerry Reed does a fair job as a sawed-off shotgun toting crimelord. The rest of the movie is a wreck. It's like the director-Reynolds in his directing debut-couldn't decide if he wanted to make a badass southern fried revenge tale-ala-"A Small Town in Texas" or a dipshit comedy. There's the lard-ass, bumbling New Yorker Fed "Irving Greenfield" and the crazy cat lady, who get involved in the investigation. There's also model Lauren Hutton-who's best work was spending a lot of time naked in "Little Fauss and Big Halsy" as a TV reporter who senses a big story-but comes off as a too-old and too feminist Nancy Drew. Her and Burt have no chemistry whatsoever-unlike the white heat he and Billingsly had in "Lightning"-you really can't care about their by-the-numbers romance that can't go anywhere. Even the fight-to the finish between Bama and Gator on a beach isn't that good. It's just a mess. They tried to do too much very late '70's social issues laced with inane comedy. They should have delved into Gator and "Bama's relationship more. Did they go to high school together?  Serve in the Army together? Do time in prison together? Why do they have this great mutual respect even though their on opposite sides of the law?  Anyway-people ask often why there wasn't a "Lightning" sequel. There was, it just wasn't very good!  Mastermind          

John Wick Chapter 2 is just as bad as the first....

Back in 2014 Keanu Reeves had a surprise hit playing a retired hitman who goes on a rampage of vengance after his wife dies and the puppy she left him is killed and his 1969 Boss 429 Mustang is stolen by Russian mobsters. It had plot holes you could drive a semi-truck through-( Why did this supposedly healthy, gorgeous, maybe 35 year old woman played by-Bridget Moniyhan-Tom Brady's ex and Tom Selleck's daughter on "Blue Bloods"-suddenly drop dead? And how did she know the exact moment of her demise so she could send him the puppy the day of her funeral? )  Why and how did he have such a unique car as a Boss 429, that's probably worth $250,000?  Besides the plot holes, it also had a bunch of over-the-top action sequences and the kill-ratio of an arcade game. Anyhow it made a pile of money, which of course spawned a sequel.  Chapter 2 opens with a pretty good chase scene between a motorcycle and a 1970 SS396 Chevelle-which chop-shop owner John Leguizamo had loaned Wick in the first one after the theft of the "Boss". You don't see the driver's face, until he's searching the dead motorcyclist for something. He finds the lead, and goes to a taxi company / chop shop, Where the brother of the Russian gangster he killed in part one has the Boss 429 and other hot premium high-end cars stored. Here I start to cringe. The Russian mobster's underling has the right idea. "If this man is so lethal,why don't we just give the car back and apologize and avoid further bloodshed?"  Of course that reasonable idea is nixed. Now I start to cringe. The Boss gets basically destroyed in a demolition derby / chase with gangsters in taxis and on motorcycles. As I watch it I hope the stunt crew bought a beater '69 Mach 1 and dressed it in Boss regalia-spoilers,scoops,louvers etc. Even if the original movie grossed hundreds of millions I hope that no one would actually destroy a "real" Boss 429!!!  It was sickening to watch if you like musclecars. Anyway he kills everyone, has a drink and declares a truce with the gangster and limps the totalled Boss home. He buries his weapons again and decides to retire again. Leguizamo shows up with a tow truck and promises to restore the Boss to it's former glory. Again were treated to small cell-phone camera glimpses of the smokin' hot Bridget Moniyhan, but no "flashback" back story of how this wonderful woman got involved with a mob hitman, no clue to what killed her-heart attack, brain tumor? Poison by his enemies?  Nothing. That's maddening in itself.  They could have had just a few minutes of scenes of them together explaining their relationship that would have went a long way to making it a better film, and explaining the first one. Nope. We've got explosions and video-game violence to get back to. Can't waste time on stuff like dialogue or character development!!  This other gangster who supposedly helped Wick retire the first time is calling in the favor wanting Wick to kill his sister who has a seat on the high commission of gangsters. Of course the commission won't disallow this prick from inheriting her position after he has her murdered, right? Another UPS truck-size plot hole. Wick refuses so the guy blows up his house. Wick then goes to the "Continental" a chain of luxury hotels / safehouses ( this was introduced in the first one ) where hitmen and other intelligence types can find sanctuary and no killing is allowed on the premises. Ian McShane returns as the proprietor of the place and tells Wick that he has to do the job for the guy, that all contracts must be honored. So Wick goes to Rome where the sister is having a big party. Upon meeting Wick they have a polite conversation about her brother's plot, and she takes her clothes off, slashes her wrists and bleeds to death while Wick holds her hand and apologises. Now the fact that she killed herself, I would think might go a long way to getting Wick off the hook with the powers that be, and screwing the brother. No he puts a bullet in her head anyway. Why? She was already dead, so why "Sign" your work?  He almost escapes when he runs into the Rapper "Common"-who was excellent on the western series "Hell on Wheels" as Anson Mount's sometime friend / nemesis. Common was the woman's bodyguard. Him and Reeves shoot each other-but they both have bulletproof suits on. So now Common and a bunch of other thugs go after Reeves who has to mow them all down in more arcade game style violence. Common and Reeves have a big fight that ends in the lobby of the Rome "Continental" where manager Franco Nero reminds them of the "no-kill" rule and offers to buy them both a drink. They have a drink and agree to kill each other another time. The brother of the slain woman then double-crosses Wick, instead of declaring his debt paid, he puts out an open contract for $7 million to avenge his sister. Now professional hitmen ( and women ) come out of the woodwork at every turn causing Reeves to show a good bit of athleticism and martial-arts training as well as much gunplay and knife-fighting. There's also a hitwoman / bodyguard of the crooked brother that for some unexplained reason is a mute that commuicates in sign language, but apparantly has the training of a Navy Seal. There's also Laurence Fishburne who apparently is some kind of intelligence operative that has an army of people also with Navy Seal type training and state of the art weaponry that masquerade as homeless people. This is never explained either. Reeves has to kill Common on a train, and about fifty other people including the mute girl before catching up with the guy who betrayed him in the bar of the "Continental". Ian McShane begs him not to do it, but Wick blows the guys brains out in the bar, violating the Cardinal Rule. Why? The guy can't live in the safehouse forever. You wait until he comes out and get him on the street. Or since Ian McShane knew the whole story, and thought Wick was totally being screwed-they could have went  to the "Commission" and had the other guy "excommunicated".  No the director wanted to rip off Charles Bronson ,Clint Eastwood, Burt Reynolds, and every other '70's action star for one moment. Which paints him into a corner. Mc Shane has no choice but to "excommunicate" Wick from the "Continental's" services. This of course will set up "Chapter 3" with more video-game mayhem. Too bad. If they'd spent a little more on story and character development, and a little less on blood and bullets and mayhem, they might have really had something. Instead you got two hours of "Grand Theft Auto". When is Hollywood going to learn?  Not until people stop paying good money for dreck like this and the "Fast&Furious". That sequel is coming out too. How did "Dominic Toretto" go from street-racing thug to James Bond? That's another rant for another time...Mastermind      

More "Factory Freaks" that people think are valuable....But Aren't!!

Some people were offended by me saying that certain cars aren't valuable, just weird. Sorry if the truth hurts, people. Here's some more people who think they have a diamond that's really a chunk of coal. # 1. 1972 Chevelle SS. From 1966-1970 the "SS" moniker on a Chevelle meant a Rat motor-usually a 396, for 1970 a 402 ( marketed as a 396, but actually 402 inches ) or a 454. For some reason in 1971 Chevrolet made the SS option available on any V8 Malibu. Which meant you could have a badass looking ride with a 2bbl 307 V8 that wheezed out 130 hp. This clown had the L65 350 with a 2bbl that had 165 hp. Of course because it's "rare" he thinks it's worth major bucks. Sorry, pal "rare" doesn't always mean "valuable".  # 2. 1972 Olds 442. Same thing here. From 1965-71 the 442 was it's own model and had either 400 ( 1965-69 ) or 455 ( 1970-71 ) cubes as standard equipment. In '72 the 442 package became an "Appearance and Handling" package on any 2 dr Cutlass model. So this guys 442 that has a 160 hp 2bbl 350, bench seats, and a column-shifted automatic is NOT worth as much as a 455, 4-speed W30 1970 model, even though there were fewer 350 2bbl models produced!!  Like I said about the "Turnpike Special" GTO-no one wants a Chevelle SS or 442 that can't outrun a 4-cylinder Honda Accord from a light!!  # 3. 1979 Trans-Am. For some insane reason in 1979 if you wanted to knock $150 off a ten grand sticker-in place of the 400 Pontiac and 403 Olds engines you got a 301 Pontiac V8 that wheezed out 150 hp. This guy is proud of his-it's black and gold-full "Bandit" regalia-T-Tops, 8 inch snowflake wheels, 4-wheel disc brakes, WS6 suspension, etc. It's a great looking car. That again-will gets it's ass handed to him by a soccer mom in a Camry. He doesn't understand why he can't sell it for $30,000!! Because hey-a buddy of his got 40k for his '79 T/A.  A 400, 4-speed,WS6, 10th Anniversary model with 8,000 original miles!!  Does the term "Apples and Oranges" come to mind?  # 4. 1971 T-37 Tempest. This guy was mortally offended when I suggested that he swap the 2bbl 350 / 3-speed manual for a 400 or 455 and a 4-speed, and put some front disc brakes on it from another A-body-( Chevelle, Monte Carlo, Cutlass, Buick Skylark, LeMans ) or get a conversion kit from Summit. "And ruin it's value?" he sneered incredulously. Tell me, what value does a 2bbl 350, 3-speed manual,4-wheel drum braked, strippy Tempest have?  If it had a 455HO ( which was an option ) and a Rock-Crusher 4-speed or a TH400 ( which were mandatory with the 455HO ) it would be worth major bucks. But If anyone actually wants a 350 Tempest or LeMans-who ISN'T planning on making a GTO clone-you can buy them for a lot less than this guy thinks his is worth. You can buy a Ram Air III Judge for less than what this guy THINKS the Tempest is worth!!  # 5. 1981 Z/28 Camaro. For some insane reason in 1981 if you bought a Z/28 with an automatic you got a 190 hp 350 backed by a TH350 and a 3.42:1 posi rear. If you wanted a 4-speed-you got a 305 that wheezed out 145 hp. I say insane reason because 1981 emission standards were not noticably stricter than 1980. And you could get a 350 / 4-speed combo in the Corvette. ( In 1980 Z/28's you could get a 4-speed with the 350. You got a 3.08:1 rear axle, but the tranny had a 3.44 1st and a 2.28 second. A great combo-harder acceleration than previous years 2.64 low and 3.73:1 rear, and much better fuel economy and top-speed on the highway! )  Anyhow-this guy is proud of his 305 model that even has the "Cowl Induction" hood. Sounds badass while you run 17 second 1/4's and get your lunch eaten by little boys in Honda Civics and soccer moms in non-turbo Subaru Foresters!!  He too was aghast when I suggested he swap in a healthy 350 or 383. If you want to buy and love some oddball car that's fine. I've always been a "Whatever Floats your Boat" kind of guy. But don't be offended and deride others who may not think it's the cat's meow, and might innocently point out that the same model with different options would be more valuable to the general public!!  Again-"Rare" doesn't always compute into "Valuable". There's a good reason why certain combinations didn't sell a lot!  Mastermind                

"Factory Freaks" aren't collectible....Their just weird!

I've had several people email me telling me about their ultra-rare cars, and some lamenting that they don't understand why they can't sell the car for the insane asking price-I mean after all it is 1 of 1 right?  A buddy of mine used to say "A Rare Turd, is still a Turd." Truer word were never spoken. Here's some of the more entertaining ones. # 1. 1966 427 Corvette. This guy is perplexed that even though he's asking $100,000 for the car-no one's even offered him 50. Why? you ask-427 Stingrays go for 50-100k all the time in Hemmings, right? What's wrong with this one?  It's a 390 hp 427 backed by a Powerglide!!  Why GM was doing this I don't know. The excellent 3-speed TH400 that was used well into the '90's was introduced in the "big" cars-i.e Chevy Impala, Pontiac Catalina, etc in 1965. Yet if you bought a musclecar-a 396 Chevelle, a GTO or 442-and wanted an automatic you got the awful 2-speed Powerglide / ST300. The TH400 wasn't used in GTO's or Chevelles until 1967! And why in God's name did they offer a Rat-motored 'Vette with one? You couldn't get a TH400 in a 'Vette until 1968!!  With a 1.76:1 low gear and a 1:1 second-anything with a Powerglide was a dog. ( TH400s have a 2.48:1 1st, a 1.48 2nd and a 1:1 third. TH350s have similar gearing-2.52,1.52,1:1.)  So even a 427 powered 'Vette is going to be a slug with a "Powerslide" and 3.08:1 or 3.36:1 gears, when others had a 4-speed and 3.70s or 4.11s!! On the upside-a TH350 is an exact bolt-in for a Powerglide-their the exact same length and use the same rear trans mount and driveshaft yoke. So the owner or a prospective buyer could swap in a TH350 and get a huge performance boost. But the exorbitant price he's asking-I mean let's be honest-I've seen documented L88's for 100 grand! And I've seen Tri-Power 435 hp, 4-speed models for 50-75!! People just go-okay that's unique, but not interested. # 2. 1967 GTO. This guy is proud of the fact that his GTO has 265 hp 2bbl engine-( The "Turnpike" special ) backed by a TH400 and 2.93:1 gears. Oh, and it has a Hurst Dual / Gate shifter. Why some dumb-ass sales manager ordered a GTO with a step-down engine and a ratchet shifter, I don't know. Maybe it was "price leader" come on gimmick. Anyway, this guy doesn't know why people aren't in awe of his pristine GTO that can't outrun a Honda Accord from a stoplight!  When I suggested he invest in a factory or aftermarket 4bbl carb and intake and some 3.55:1 gears to get a huge performance boost, he was aghast. "Modify a rare classic?" he said incredulously. Couldn't convince him that his car wasn't worth anything other than being a clean GTO body; he thinks it's worth more than a Ram Air IV Judge-because there's less of his model! Good luck with that. Which brings up Idiot # 3. 1980 Corvette. For a short time in 1980 Chevrolet had no 350 V8s cerified with California emissions. So while the other 49 states could buy 1980 Corvettes with a 190 hp L48 350 with either a 4-speed or a TH350, or the 230 hp L82 with a TH350-in California you could only get a 305 that wheezed out 145 hp backed by a slushbox. Enthusiasts and the buff magazines howled bloody murder. Chevrolet reacted quickly and got the 350s EPA Certified for California, and the great disturbance in the force was quelled. However, every once in a while you see some idiot advertsing his "Ultra-rare" 305 'Vette for sale for some outrageous price-usually more than what people ask for late '70's L82 / 4-speed Silver Anniversary or Indy Pace Car models. And their shocked that they have no offers. Anyhow-cars like this aren't collectible, their just weird. I've seen Mach 1 Mustangs with stripes,spoilers,hood scoops,rear window louvers, and Magnum 500 wheels-full badass regalia-with 2bbl 351s under the hood. I've seen Dodge Chargers with 2bbl 383s and 400s under the hood. Three-speed sticks, two-speed automatics, cars with no power steering, etc-are just odd. I've seen Pontiac Gran Prixs with 4-speed manuals behind 400s and 428s, I've seen Monte Carlos with 4-speed sticks, and with a three on the tree! Back in the '60's and '70's if something was standard equipment or optional-you can bet some idiot wanted it-no matter how odd it was. But I wouldn't pay big bucks for one. Here's a perfect example a guy is asking $70,000-that's righ I said seventy grand not seven-for a 1971 Dodge Demon. He say he can document that it's the only one sold by Mr Norm's Grand Spaulding Dodge. It has a 340 V8 that Mr Norms supposedly put a "Six-Pack" induction system on as a dealer-installed option. The car also has ugly plaid vynil bench seats, no power steering, no guages, four-wheel drum brakes, and it's a 3-speed stick. And it has a vynil top. On the same website their selling a pristine 1973 340 Duster that has a Torqeflite,bucket seats and a console, power steering, power front disc brakes, and factory a/c. And a factory sunroof. And it was priced at $29,000. I say priced because it sold in less than a week. Gee, wonder why the "1 of 1" Demon hasn't sold for 70K??  70 K? That's 440 / Six-Pack Charger or Challenger money pal, not for a strippy 340 Demon with ugly upholstery!!  Anyhow-unless their dirt-cheap, I'd avoid these "rare" turds. I mean birds. Mastermind

Why going for "Every Last Ounce" isn't always a good idea...

Gearheads have a tendency to never be satisfied, to always be looking for the next edge in performance. Sometimes that's a good thing, but sometimes it can bite you in the ass. Here's a few examples. # 1. "Air Gap" intake manifolds. NASCAR racers discovered that by raising the plenum and allowing air to flow under the runners, that they gained 10-15 hp on the top end because of the cooler fuel charge. Edelbrock, Holley and other companies began selling these "Air-Gap" manifolds to the public. In sunny California or at Daytona, this works fine. Whether or not you can actually feel a 10-15 hp gain in the average street car remains open for debate. However, in many northern or Rocky Mountain states people that ran out and bought these intakes were furious in the fall,winter and spring. Their cars would not start and idle properly, sometimes taking 20 minutes or more to warm up, and many wouldn't run at all because of carburator Icing! The buff magazines were deluged with angry letters, and Summit, Jeg's, and other retailers of speed parts were getting angry letters and emails from people demanding refunds, saying they re-installed their old intake so the car would start properly! That 15 hp wasn't looking that good now!  # 2. "We shall Overcam". As we all know-"bigger" isn't always better. Especially on a street machine with an automatic transmission,when it comes to cam selection, it's better to err on the side of caution. Here's a perfect example, and thankfully my friend didn't take the advice of the "expert" at Summitt. He had a '78 T/A with the W72 400, a TH350, and 3.23:1 gears. He installed the Edelbrock Performer package-heads, cam, intake and headers. According to Edelbrock this combo makes 387 hp and 439 lbs of torque and makes 15 inches of vacuum at idle. I believe it. This T/A would literally spin it's tires as long as you wanted to stay on the throttle, idled smooth, and had more power than you'd ever need. He was escatatic. Then some idiot salesman told him he should "upgrade" to the Performer RPM cam and intake because that combo made 422 hp and 441 lbs of torque. He asked me what I thought. I told him absolutely, positively do not change a thing on his car!!  Here's why-1st off-why spend a bunch of money and time to gain 35 hp and 2 lbs of torque? Honestly-all other things being equal-and especially with street tires-not slicks or drag radials-is a car with 422 hp going to be noticably quicker than one with 387 hp?  And-the "Performer RPM" cam is an exact replica of the factory RAIV cam-which was only available with 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears for a reason! It barely makes 10 inches of vacuum at idle, and your giving up quite a bit of low-end and mid-range torque for top-end rush. To take full advantage of it, he'd need to swap his 3.23:1 gears for some 4.10s and he'd probably need a 2,500 rpm torque converter as well. Which would ruin the car's wonderful drivability. The motor buzzing at 3,500 rpm on the freeway at 70 mph is not pleasant. Luckily-he took my advice and is still very happy with his car's performance-with roughy 400 hp-it blows the doors off  95% of the stoplight challengers he encounters, it idles smooth, cruises effortlessly on the freeway and purrs like a kitten until you hit the loud pedal. He doesn't need that "last ounce" of performance at the expense of a LOT of good drivabilty. Motor Trend made this point in an ultra-exotic sports car comparo recently. They said they loved the Aston-Martin V12 Vantage for it's all around feel and great performance up to "8 or 9 / 10ths ". What they meant was-yes, the Nissan GTR, the Corvette Z06, the Porsche 911 Turbo were faster around the Nurburging and Willow Springs raceway. But 99 out of 100 people who buy them are never going to push the cars to that absolute limit. Hence-the 8 or 9 tenths comment. When is Joe Average going to run a Z06 or GTR or 911 Turbo absolutely flat-out?  The same goes for your musclecar. If all your doing is drag racing it, then by all means do everything you can to get every last tenth shaved off your time. But if your going to drive the car at all, it might behoove you to leave a tenth or two on the table in the interest of a pleasant Sunday drive or Wednesday night cruise!!  Mastermind  

Read the whole article before you decide to buy or not buy parts....

Like I said in a previous post a lot of people are disappointed in their projects because they read snippets of a magazine article or read some quote from some "expert" on the internet and then spend money-or worse yet-don't buy parts they need because they didn't read the whole article. Here's some examples of why taking one paragraph of an article is a bad idea.  # 1. High-Performance Pontiac magazine did an article called "Junkyard Jewel" about building up a 455 that they bought from-duh-a junkyard. It came out of a '76 Gran Prix. It had 7.6:1 compression and was factory rated at 200 hp. They did some baseline testing on the stock engine and then started throwing parts at it. The first thing they did was put a set of headers on it. This showed exactly no gain on the dyno. Then they put an Edelbrock Performer intake on it. This also showed no gain. They were perplexed. Then they put a hot cam in it, and it LOST power! This further perplexed them.  Then,one of these geniuses figured out that with 7.6:1 compression and the lazy "smog" cam-the engine didn't breathe enough to NEED the headers and the intake upgrade. And that the "hot" cam effectively lowered the static compression ratio to like 6:1-which killed what little power it did have. They added a set of 87cc Edelbrock Heads. In addition to the better breathing the much smaller ( stock was 114cc ) combustion chambers bumped the compression from 7.6:1 to like 9.2:1. With the stock iron intake and stock manifolds it gained almost 100 hp, but was all done in by 4,400 rpm. After re-installing the headers and the Performer intake, they gained another 100 hp. And it pulled hard to 5,700 rpm!  After fiddling with the timing,carb jetting and distributor curve-they ended up with 440 hp and 467 lbs ft of torque!!  A gain of 240 hp!! Not bad for heads, cam, intake and headers on a junkyard motor!!  The '76 intake had the EGR valve intruding into the throttle opening, which severely restricted power above 4,000 rpm!! After this article came out I talked to a guy that had a disco-era T/A. I told him the three biggest improvements he could make would be a Performer intake, headers and dual exhausts and swapping the 2.56:1 gears for some 3.42:1s would make it really rock. "Maybe I'll change the gears, but I read in High-performance Pontiac that headers and the intake didn't help" Arrrggghhhh!!!!  I told him to read the WHOLE article-that the intake and headers did help immensely-just not on an engine with the wrong cam and 6:1 compression!!  # 2. This guy bought a set of headers for his truck and was aghast because it ran better with the stock manifolds. He'd read in Hot Rod that Hooker Headers with 2 1/ 4 inch primary tubes made the most power on a big block Chevy. Except the test mule was a 12:1 compression, 720 hp 572 inch stroker with a .714 lift solid roller cam!!  And even on the monster 572-these only showed a gain over 2 inch tubes above 5,500 rpm!!  Obviously, these huge headers killed the bottom-end and mid-range torque on his otherwise stock 454!! I told him-engines need some backpressure to run properly, and that he'd be much better off with 1 3/4 inch headers or 1 7/8 max, even if he added a bigger cam and intake!!  He went to 1 3/4 headers and was happy as a clam-the truck had noticably more power all through the range, and got better gas mileage too!  # 3. I had two disco-era T/A's back in the day. One had a 400 Pontiac and the other had a 403 Olds. My 403 Olds T/A blew the doors off many other surprised T/A  owners, including the owner of a 403 DKM "Macho", and a 400,4-speed Pontiac model. The way I did it was mine had headers and real dual exhausts, and a Holley "Street Dominator" intake. This vastly improved power, but it still wouldn't rev over 4,700 rpm. "Experts" in magazines said the 403s had a "lazy" cam, and that I'd have to change the cam, lifters, and valvesprings and get an adjustable valvetrain and roller rockers to do better, and that without a big cam change, the intake and exhaust upgrades wouldn't help. I figured out that 403s used AC R46SZ plugs which had an .080 gap. ( A longer spark burns cleaner and makes less smog ). Even GM's mighty HEI couldn't bridge an .080 gap at high rpm. By simply changing to R45S plugs-a .040 gap-the engine pulled hard to 5,400 rpm!! A gain of 700 rpm on the top end! This made a huge increase in performance. ( Obviously-I didn't need to change the cam and whole valvetrain! )  I also had a TransGo shift kit that would automatically kick down to low gear below 15 mph. So if another T/A and I were coming up to a light that turned green and we punched it-I'd be in low, and he'd still be in 2nd. All other things being equal-who's going to accelerate harder?  Then factor in the intake, exhaust and ignition changes-and you can see how I'd smoke supposedly "faster" cars. I simply maximized the performance of the car without spending a ton of money. 403s were rated at 185 hp stock. Mine dyno'd at 260!! An increase of 75 hp!!  I proved all the "Experts" wrong who said hopping up a 403 was a "waste of time" because of the 8:1 compression and "lazy" cam!!  # 4. A friend of mine was building a "Street Stock" claimer circle track 350 Chevy engine. Everyone told him you "Gotta Have" "2.02" heads. I gave him a set of '81-86 305 heads. The 58cc combustion chambers ( opposed to 76cc 350 heads ) bumped the compression on his L48 350 from 8.2:1 to 9.6:1. The 305 heads have 1.84 inch intake valves ( as opposed to 1.94 on standard 350 heads or 2.02 on hi-performance heads ). I told him the huge power and torque boost of the added compression would more than offset the slight loss of airflow of the slightly smaller intake valves. He was amazed at the power bump these "free" heads gave him. This left the money he would have spent on a set of heads to go for cam, exhaust, intake, and ignition. And he was still under the $1,500 rule. He won quite a few races beating people who had spent way more money on their engines-even though they'd lose it if someone excersised the "claim" rule. The point I'm making is, do some research and make sure you have ALL the information before you spend your hard-earned money, or discount a part or a procedure as a "waste of time." Mastermind                      

All these supercars were under-rated for the same reasons....

A lot of High-performance cars have their horsepower ratings grossly under-rated by the manufacturers. This was usually done for three reasons-( 1) To make the cars dominant in stock class drag racing, ( 2) To avoid the wrath of the safety Nazis, and ( 3 ) To avoid high insurance premiums. As early as 1966 activists like Ralph Nadar were demonizing musclecars and insurance companies were exorbitantly raising the rates on cars with engines over 400 cubic inches and hp ratings over 300 hp. Here's some classic examples # 1. Boss 302 Mustang / Z/28 Camaro. The 290 hp ratings that both Chevy and Ford had for these cars is laughable. The Trans-Am racers run by Mark Donohue,and Parnelli Jones and others had about 460 hp; and except for headers and maybe a little more cam, they weren't that far from stock. Think of this-the 11:1 302 Chevy with Corvette "Fuelie" heads, a hot solid-lifter cam,an aluminum high-rise intake and a 780 Holley , makes 5 hp LESS than a standard headed, 10:1, "station wagon" hydraulic cammed, iron intake with a Quadrajet 350?  The Boss 302 with "Cleveland" heads having ports and valves the size of a 427 Chevy,a hot solid-lifter cam, an aluminum intake with a 780 Holley and special exhaust manifolds only makes the same hp as the "station wagon", hydraulic-cammed, iron intake with a 470 cfm Autolite 4300 carbed 351W?  Really? These engines were making 350 hp off the showroom floor, easily. # 2. Ram Air IV 400 Pontiac. The 370 hp rating for this engine is utterly ridiculous. Especially since the "big car" 400 that was the GTO's standard engine was rated at 350 and the RAIII which had a bigger cam over the base model and Ram Air induction was rated at 366. Pontiac engineers want us to believe that completely new cylinder heads with round port exhausts and iron headers, a hot cam with .520 lift and a special valvetrain with longer valves, and pushrods and dual springs, and an aluminum high-rise intake is only worth 4 hp over the standard D-port headed, iron intaked, .414 lift cammed RAIII?  That's why in drag testing they usually ran within 1/10th of the vaunted LS6 Chevelles-because in the same weight car-they had 80 hp less!!  Riigghht. # 3. 428CJ Ford. This one takes real balls. 38 extra cubes, 427 style heads,a hot cam, and a 735 cfm Holley on an aluminum or iron "Police Interceptor" intake is only worth 15 hp over the standard LTD / Station Wagon / Pickup 390?  That's the story Ford was selling and they stuck to it all years of production. The "generic" 390 was rated at 320 hp; the 428CJ with nearly 40 extra cubes and all those go-fast goodies only had 335?  Puhleeze. # 4. L88 427 Chevy. You belive that the 12.5:1 compression, rectangular port headed, solid-lifter cammed, aluminum intaked, 830 Holley carbed L88 only made 430 hp, when the 10:1, oval-port headed,hydraulic cammed, iron intake with a Quadrajet 427 that was optional in "big cars" and the standard big-block in the 'Vette was rated at 390?  Or that it had 5 hp LESS than the 11:1, smaller cammed, tri-power L72 / L89??  Evryone knows the L88 was putting out at least 500 hp if it made an ounce!!  # 5. "W31" Olds 350. I touched on this one in a previous post. The standard Olds 350 4bbl has 310 hp; Olds wants us to believe that heads with bigger valves, special exhaust manifolds, an aluminum high-rise intake and a 308 degree cam are only worth 15 hp over the base engine?  And require a 4-speed and 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears!!   #6. 1985-87 Buick Grand National. Do you honestly believe a 3,600 lb car can run high 13s in the 1/4 off the showroom floor with only 245 hp?  Like Ditka says-"Come on,Man!!"  GNs were making at least 350 hp; GM just didn't want to say it publicly and ire the insurance companies and the safety Nazis. Think-the LB9 TPI 305 in the IROC-Z was rated at 230 hp, and they could only run low 15s. 15 hp can drop a full second off the 1/4 time?  If you believe that-like George Strait says-"Ive got some oceanfront property in Arizona.."  I'm sure I overlooked a few-the 340 Six-Pack only had 290 hp, when the 4bbls had 275?  The L78 396, which had the same heads, cam, carb and intake, etc as the vaunted 450 hp LS6 454 didn't have 400+ hp but only 375? When the oval port, hydraulic-cammed, Q-jet equipped base model L34 had 350?  Anyhow, you have to take the ratings with a grain of salt and look at the performance figures. Mastermind

Factor in the Whole Combination before you throw parts at it....

I've seen it so many times-people read an article in one of the buff magazines about an intake manifold, cam, torque converter, etc that makes the most power in a dyno test or offers the biggest improvement in 1/4 mile e.t. ,they go out and buy it for their car, and are severely disappointed because they didn't get the same results the magazine did, or worse yet-the car ran better stock. The reason for this is people don't take into account the intended purpose of the engine build, or the whole combination. Here's a couple perfect examples. A guy I know read in a magazine that the Edelbrock Victor Jr intake and 750 Holley Double-Pumper made the most power and torque on a dyno test of a small-block Chevy. He goes to his local speed shop, and buys this combo for his '79 Camaro and is furious when it doesn't run as good as it did stock. Here's what he missed. The magazine test mule was an 11:1 compression 406 with Trick Flow Aluminum heads,a Comp Cams 280H Magnum cam and 1 3/4 inch headers. The Victor Jr-which is basically a NASCAR manifold designed to make power from 3,500-8,000 rpm-may have knocked 25-30lbs ft of torque off at idle-but with 450+ lbs ft on tap from the 406, that didn't hurt. And from 3,000-7,000 it REALLY rocked-adding 40+ hp on the top end compared to the nearest competitor. When he put it on his 8.5:1 stock 350 that had maybe 280 lbs ft of torque AT THE PEAK, it killed the bottom-end. And since the stock 350 with a "smog" cam-was all done in by 5,000 rpm-the Victor Jr-which doesn't even START to make power until almost 4,000-didn't help the top-end either. The car ran better with the stock iron intake and a Q-Jet!!  Now here's an opposite scenario. Pontiac builders have long said that it's hard to improve on the '67-74 factory intakes. That back in the '70's aftermarket ones even showed a loss at some speeds, and that only the Edelbrock Torker showed a 20 hp gain, above 4,000 rpm. In the intervening years Edelbrock has come out with the Performer RPM-which out performs the Torker at all rpm levels. Anyhow-a buddy with a '66 GTO put a Ram Air IV cam and a Torker intake on his car, and his 1/4 mile time dropped by more than 1/2 a second. He was esctatic. How did that happen? Well, for one thing-his car has a 10.75:1 compression 389, a 4-speed and 3.90:1 gears. ( In 1969-70 The RAIV was only available with 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears ). Secondly-at the drags he revs the car to 3,500-4,000 rpm and drops the clutch hard, and then powershifts at 6,000 rpm. Shifting at 6,000 rpm-he's going to hit 2nd ( and subsequent gears ) about 4,400 rpm. Right in the thick of the Torker intakes and the RAIV cam's 3,500-6,500 rpm power / torque peak. Now if he put this combo on an 8:1 400 in a '77 T/A with an automatic and 2.56:1 gears, it would have absolutley KILLED the performance, running worse than stock. See what I'm saying?  Here's the rule of thumb. Larger engines can take more "cam" than smaller ones, because they have more torque to spare. For example-the old L79 "350hp 327" cam for small-block Chevys-that was only used with a 4-speed and 3.70:1 or 4.11:1 gears in Corvettes and a few Novas and Chevelles-would absolutely kill a 305. It would work pretty good in a 350 with a 4-speed and 3.42:1 gears or an automatic with a 2,500 rpm converter, and it would be really sweet in a 383 / 400 even with a stock torque converter. Manual transmission cars can take more "cam" because idle speed isn't as important, and the driver can launch at whatever rpm he desires by manipulating the clutch. This applies to other things besides intakes and cams. Heads for instance. Here's a couple good examples. Years ago, Car Craft built identical 454 Chevy engines-same compression, cam, intake,exhaust,etc-except for one thing-one had "standard" oval-port heads, and one had "Hi-Performance" rectangular port heads. Here's the shocker-on the dyno-the rectangular port heads did not show a noticeable gain until 6,300 rpm!!  Now in your street / strip machine-or even a race car-how often are you going to be above 6,300 rpm??  A few years ago Hot Rod did a hop-up article on the GMPP "ZZ4" crate engine. If you don't know-the "ZZ4" was a 350 that was pretty hopped up to begin with-aluminum heads and intake, roller cam, 10:1 cmpression, etc. It had 355 hp and 418 lbs ft of torque. What made it such an awesome street engine was it made over 350 lbs ft from 1,800-5,200 rpm. Anyhow they experimented with hotter cams, dual and single-plane intakes, different carbs, etc. The last thing they did was add a set of Trick Flow aluminum heads, which cost $1,400!!. Here's the kicker-the "Antiquated" stock L98 heads were within 5 hp and 5 lbs ft of torque at every rpm up to 4,600!! Now how often are you going to be above 4,700 rpm in most driving conditions?  Granted, the Trick Flows did offer a 40 hp gain-at 6,100 rpm!! Now on an all-out race car-that might be worth it. But think of this-for $1,400 you could buy a well thought out nitrous system, a higher stall-speed torque converter, stiffer rear end gears, etc. that would give you a better gain than 40 peak hp at 6,000 rpm!!  Here's why I balk at "Gotta Haves" when people are people are talking about building a small-block Chevy or Ford. The "Gotta Haves" I'm talking about are usually forged pistons, shot-peened rods, 4-bolt mains, screw in studs, etc etc. This is all well and good if your building a NASCAR engine that has to go 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona. But for a street machine? People will say what if you want to run a blower or nitrous? To that I say-If you have that much money and need to go that fast, why aren't you building a 454 instead of a 350, or a 460 instead of a 302?  Anyhow it's better to err on the side of caution, especially if the car is a street machine. Mastermind        

More cars that don't exist....

Here's some more cars that some people insist were built, but in reality never were, and the reasons why. #1. Ram Air V GTO.  In 1968-69 Herb Adams and other engineers were working furiously on a "Tunnel-Port" 303 inch Pontiac engine to run in the Trans-Am series. They felt they needed it to compete with Ford, who already had a "Tunnel-Port" 302. ( "Boss 302" ring a bell? ) In testing they figured out that the huge heads-which had ports and valves the size of a 427 Chevy-were too much for the little 303 inch engine. The 303s actually ran better with production Ram Air IV heads. With the RAIV heads they made about 485 hp; about the same power level as the 302 Chevy and Ford engines. Adams, Doug Nash, Arnie Beswick and others tried the Tunnel-Port heads on the larger 400 and 428 engines and were astounded. With an aluminum intake and a hot General Kinetics solid-lifter cam,they were making power equal to the vaunted 427 Chevys and 426 Chrysler Hemis. Adams & Company were excited and pushed to get it in production, hoping to make the GTO the "King of the Street" again like it was in 1964-66. However, for some reason John DeLorean and the Pontiac brass refused to warranty a solid-lifter engine. Adams argued that Chevrolet warrantied several solid-lifter small and big-block engines. DeLorean and the brass refused to budge, and the option was cancelled. They had parts to build about 600 engines, so Adams suggested they sell them over the counter to racers. Royal Pontiac swapped one into a '69 Judge that was featured in Hot Rod; but it wasn't a production car. Royal Pontiac Mechanic Milt Schornak campaigned a 1970 RA V GTO drag car with great success. Doug Nash built single and dual-quad intakes for the RA V and he campaigned one as well. But there was never a production version.  # 2. Boss 429 Cougar. Trying to homologate the Boss 429 for NASCAR to compete with the nearly invincible 426 Chrysler Hemi,( NASCAR rules said at least 500 units had to be sold to the public to be legal for racing ) Ford came up with the Boss 429 Mustang. Why they chose the Mustang, I don't know-The Wood Brothers, A.J. Foyt, Cale Yarborough and other Ford Nascar racers ran Torinos and Mercury Cyclones, not Mustangs. Boss 429s started life as 428 cars and were shipped to Kar Kraft for the Boss Nine conversion. The shock towers were relocated, and the suspension modified to make the huge engine fit. Ford lost money on every one. There were two Boss Nine Cougars built-for drag racers "Dyno" Don Nicholson and "Fast Eddie" Schartmann. Nicholson pulled the Boss Nine and replaced it with an old-school 427 Cammer. Schartmann campaigned his, but with not much success, the car was slow. ( By Super Stock or Pro Stock standards ). There were NEVER any other Boss 429 Cougars, ever.  # 3. 1970-71 LS6 Monte Carlo, '71 LS6 Chevelle. Morons insist that "A few" LS6 454 SS Monte Carlos were built in 1970-71. Their wrong. The LS6 was only offered in the Chevelle line in 1970. I explained in a previous post why there were no 1970 LS6 Corvettes. In 1971, for some inexplicable reason, the roles were reversed. With 9:1 compression and a 425 hp rating, the LS6 was only available in Corvettes. About 1100 were built. The option was listed in early '71 Chevelle sales literature, but was dropped before any were built. There were no LS6 '71 Chevelles. And there were definitely no '70-71 LS6 Monte Carlos. I have never seen a build sheet or window sticker for one, and no Chevrolet engineer has ever verified one. The 365 hp LS5 454 was the highest power engine available in Monte Carlos. # 4. 1971 "Stage II" Buick GSX / 1971 RA V 455 GTO. The performance of the "Stage 1" 455 1970 Buick GSX's was legendary. Rumor has it that Pontiac wanted to make a Ram Air V 455 and that Buick wanted to make a "Stage II" 455 to compete with the LS6 and LS7 Chevys and 426 Hemi Chryslers. The story is that an ultra-badass Skylark and a GTO were built by Buick and Pontiac engineers respectively and a grudge match was held on a Michigan drag strip, and both cars ran high 10s, although the Buick won by two car lengths. In late 1970-( for the upcoming '71 model year ) GM brass decreed that compression ratios be lowered across the board to run on low-lead fuels,and every GM car had the compression lowered to 8.5:1 except for LT1 and LS6 Chevys, which had 9:1. Ford and Chrysler still had high compression engines in '71. So the GM Muscle Movement was over, and the options never saw the light of day. The Buick was reportedly destroyed in a fire at the Buick proving grounds; no one knows what happened to the Pontiac. # 5. 1975 455HO Trans-Am. In early 1975, Pontiac dropped the 455 from the T/A's option list, leaving a 185 hp, 7.6:1 compression 400 as the only engine. Enthusiasts and the Buff magazines howled bloody murder. Pontiac quickly came up with a "455HO" performance package that had a 455, a 4-speed and a 3.23:1 axle ratio. Of the 23,000+ T/A's sold in '75, only 857 had this option. Another 7,508 ( out of 46,000 ) were sold in '76.  However-the engine was a garden-variety 7.6:1 compression, "station wagon" 455 that wheezed out 200 hp, not the Ram Air IV headed, round port exhaust, aluminum intake, 068 cammed torque monster from 1971-72. In fact-the buff magazines bitched about them desecrating a classic name, and the "HO" moniker was dropped for '76, and the option simply called "455 Performance Package." Anyhow-I do get tired of constantly hearing some clown talk about these "Area 51" cars. Mastermind                

"No you didn't!".....A#$%hole!!!

Maybe it's the post holiday blues, or maybe I'm just getting old and cranky, but for some reason stupid people bother me more than they used to. I guess I should invoke one of "Murphy's Laws"-"Never argue with an idiot, because people might not know the difference."  But sometimes you just can't let shit go in one ear and out the other, you have to disagree. What's getting my goat this week is people claiming to have owned some super-rare car, and after talking to them, you realize they didn't, and their talking out their ass about a totally different car!  Here's some highlights of what's put me in such a state...# 1. I recently sold my one of 1,097 ever built 1973 Hurst / Olds. It was white and gold with the swivel captian's chairs, Hurst Dual / Gate ratchet shifter, digital tach on the console, and the 455 / TH400 powertain. I even had the original owner's manual and the original spare in the trunk. The buyer came all the way from Kansas City, Missouri to buy it. Anyway I was talking about Olds 442s with a co-worker when this clown from another shop looks at the picture of my car and says "I had one just like that." "Just like that?" I said cynically. "You had one of 1,097 ever made?"  Was it black or white? I asked. "It was green." The guy said. "Would you like to go for double jeapordy where the scores can really change?" I said. "1973 Hurst / Olds' were only available in black and gold or white and gold." He produces a picture of green two-door '77 Cutlass!!!  It wasn't even a 442, just a garden variety Cutlass.  Moron!!  I guess you could say their both Cutlasses, but a generic 350 '77 Cutlass is a far cry from a '73 Hurst / Olds!!!  # 2. A neighbor of mine has a for-real, one of 1,603 1969 Boss 302 Mustang.  He had his garage door open the other day and we were chatting about cars. A guy walking down the street stops and says-( I cringe when I hear these words ) "I had one just like that." My neighbor and I both roll our eyes like a 14 year old girl. The guy caught it. "What?" "You don't believe me?" "No I don't believe you." I said. "Of the 299,000 Mustangs Ford sold in 1969, this is one of 1,600 ever built." "I seriously doubt that you had one." "Was it a 4-speed or an automatic?" I asked. "It was an automatic." "Sorry, you lose." "Boss 302s were all 4-speeds." "Mine was a 351, but it looked just like that." "Then you may have had a Mach 1, but you didn't have a Boss 302." The guy calls his wife and has her text him a picture of his old car from their photo album. Sure enough-a nice looking, 1970-not '69 by the way-Mach 1. I'll admit that the Mach 1 graphics look similar to a Boss 302, especially with Magnum 500 wheels and "Sport Slats" ( rear window louvers ) it would be easy to confuse them at 20 feet. But again-a 351C / C6 '70 Mach 1 is a nice car, but it's not a '69 Boss 302!!  # 3. This one really drove me up the wall. I was at Summit Racing and ran into a buddy there. We were discussing rare Pontiacs. The DKM "Macho T/A's" came up. My pal brought up a picture of a blue and silver one on his i-phone. ( What posesses these assholes to insert themselves into two total strangers conversation?? )  A passerby again says-"I had one just like that."  "Except mine was a Turbo."  Knowing that DKM only built about 600 cars from '77-79 and that only about 45 total ( 27 in '78, and another 16 in '79 I beleive ) had the H-O Racing Specialties Turbo installed, we both blurted out in unison, "You had one of these with a Turbo?"  "Yeah." I bought it brand-new in 1981."  Arrrrggghhhh!!! Red Flag right there!! Here's why.  DKM tried to play with a few 1980 Turbo 301 T/A's, but unlike the 400 Pontiacs and 403 Olds motors, they couldn't really be hopped up, especially with the then-fledgling electronicially controlled ignition,carburator and Turbo. They swapped small-block Chevys into a few, but ultimately Dennis Mecham said they gave up, and only something like 7 ( seven ) 1980 "Machos" were built before they quit. There were no 1981 Machos at all. Mecham tried again in 1983 with the "MSE T/A"-( Mecham Special Edition ) but the 305 powered 3rd gen models had nowhere near the success or "cult" following of the "Machos."  After much argument this guy goes to the book section of the store, comes back with a copy of Michael Lamm's book-"The Fabulous Firebird" and shows us a picture of a 1981 Turbo Formula!!!  It wasn't even a T/A!!!  "See, that's the car I bought in 1981!" He says triumphantly. Ugh. Sorry, pal a Turbo 301 '81 Formula, is not the same as a 400, H-O Racing, Turbocharged one of 27 ever built '78 Macho!!!  # 4. Another late '70's "Macho" machine. This one we saw at a Mopar club "Show&Shine". It was a '78 Dodge D150 "Macho" 4x4 pickup. It was pristine, with the black and yellow paint job, roll bar, "Macho" graphics, and huge tires on black spoke wheels. This one also had a 440 under the hood. Since a 400 small-block and a 351 / 400M with a 2bbl were the biggest engines avaiable in a Chevy K10 and Ford F150 respectively, this was a Macho truck indeed. Again-Mr "I have one just like that". shows up. "Is it here?" we ask. "In the Parking lot" "Let's go see it." my friend and I ask. The guy leads us to the parking lot and proudly shows us a long bed, primered, 3/4 ton '76 D200 with a 318 under the hood!!!  Really???  Ok, their both Dodge Trucks, but the similarity ends there!!. That's like saying a V6 regular cab '03 F150 is "Just Like" a crew-cab, Supercharged Harley-Davidson Edition!! ( Basically a 4-door "Lightning" with a 340 hp Blown 5.4 )  You can say I'm splitting hairs,but for god's sake-saying you had something "just like" something rare is pretty stupid, when your not sure what your talking about. I wouldn't walk up to a rare gun dealer selling a "Buntline Special" ( an 1870's Colt .45 with a 10 inch barrel presented to Wyatt Earp, Bat Masterson, and other famous lawmen by Colt and Sportswriter Ned Buntline ) and say "I have one just like that". And then show him my 1996 Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum with an 8-inch barrel!! Yes, their both single-action revolvers, but that's about it!!!  If your not positive, then keep your damn mouth shut, and don't jump into other people's conversations with dumb-ass comments!!  Just had to vent that.  Mastermind            

More cars that "Experts" are wrong on...

I hate to be so cynical all the time, but like I said in the last post I get really tired of people who don't know what they're talking about, are misinformed, or are just plain stupid trying to "educate" me and tell me how knowledgable they are about cars-when their usually wrong. It's infuriating. Here's some more that I get tired of hearing about. # 1. "W31" 1970 Rallye 350 Cutlass. This car was NEVER "Almost" the 1970 Hurst / Olds. There was no H / O planned for 1970.  The Rallye 350 was an "Insurance Beater"-like the T37 Pontiac Tempest, and 340 Duster. ( Insurance companies were jacking up the rates on musclecars, escpecially anything with an engine over 400 cubic inches. ) Anyhow, the Rallye 350 was a base model Cutlass with a super loud Sebring Yellow paint job, body-colored bumpers and a "Judge" type rear spoiler. Power was the standard 310 hp 350 V8 backed by either a 4-speed or a TH350. 3,527 were built, so while rare, their not exactly a moon rock. And they are NOT a 442 in any way shape or form. The 442 was it's own model, and all 1970 442s had 455 cubes under the hood. The "W31" was a hopped up 350 that was available in base model Cutlasses and F85s from 1968-1970. It had special heads and exhaust manifolds,an aluminum intake, and a 308 degree cam, which was why it was only available with a 4-speed and 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears! They were grossly under-rated at 325 hp!!  All that extra hi-po stuff is only worth 15 hp over the base,"station wagon" 350?  Riigghht. The "W31" was in "Insurance Beater" too. Anyhow-Idiots constantly claim to have or know of a "W31" Rallye 350 Cutlass, even though no Olds engineer or other GM employee has ever verified one, no buff magazine has ever verified one, and no one has ever produced a window sticker or build sheet for one!! Arrgghhh!!!  # 2. 4-speed 1969 Hurst / Olds. George Hurst hit one out of the park in 1968 when he took the 455 out of the Toronado, put the "W30" goodies on it and stuffed it a 442 backed by a TH400 with a Hurst "Shotgun" converter and a Dual / Gate shifter. The '68 model also had a cool silver and black paint job. Only 515 were built, but they really boosted Olds' Performance image with all the press they got from the buff magazines. In 1969 The H / O was even more badass. It had an agressive scooped hood, a "Judge" style spoiler, a gorgeous white and gold paint job and rally wheels. 906 were built, all with the 455 / TH400 powertrain. Morons insist that the son of a Michigan Olds dealer wanted one with a 4-speed and that one was specially built. Both Oldsmobile and Hurst Performance deny this, saying all 1969 H/O's ( and all model years after for that matter ) were automatics. Other morons say the father had his service department convert one from a TH400 to a 4-speed. Again, no one has ever shown up at a car show with a 4-speed '69 H / O, with a window sticker or build sheet showing it as an original TH400 car; or with a story or any documentation that it was a "Day Two" modification. The car simply doesn't exist. Think-with only 906 of these ultra-premium cars built-not every dealer got one. In fact with over 3,000 Olds dealers across the country back then-about 90% of them didn't get one!  And if you owned a dealership that did-instead of selling it for an exorbitant profit-your going to give it to your spoiled brat, and then cut it up and make it "non-original" so that if your brat doesn't wreck it, and you want to sell it, it's not worth anything because it's modified??  If your brat wanted a 4-speed H/O, wouldn't it be easier to just convince him to take a "Regular" 4-speed 442? Or swap in a 455 and paint it like an H/O if you wanted to indulge him that badly??  No businessman in his right mind would do that, no matter how spoiled his kids were!!  # 3. 1971-72 GTO Station Wagon. I get so tired of this one. In 1971-72, the "Endura" ( Read GTO plastic front end and scooped hood ) could be ordered on any LeMans model, including wagons. 400 and 455 V8s were available. However-these were garden-variety 400s and 455s, both rated at 250 hp. The vaunted 455HO rated at 335 hp ( '71) and 300 ( '72 ) was only available in the Trans-Am, the Formula 455, the GTO and the LeMans GT. It was never optional in a  wagon, ever. So every clown that claims to have a GTO wagon has a LeMans with the "Endura" front end and scooped hood. Period. # 4. 1971 Cuda AAR / Challenger T/A. The 1970 AAR 'Cuda and Challenger T/A were badass looking with their blacked out, scooped hoods,spoilers,and staggered tire sizing ( E60-15 front / G60-15 rear ) which gave them a mean rake, and loud exhaust that exited in front of the rear wheels gave them a mean sound. With a snarling 340 Six-Pack under the hood, they could back up the image. The option is listed in early '71 sales literature, and there was even a early advertisement for the Challenger T/A in CARS magazine-but thats a '70 model with the '71 grille airbrushed in. The option was killed and never made '71 production. And again-no one has ever produced a window sticker, build sheet, or vin tag for a '71 T/A / AAR.  # 5. 1970 Shelby GT350. These technichally exist. But they are leftover '69 models that were given 1970 vin numbers and sold until they were gone. That's why they have the 351W under the hood, which was the standard Mach 1 engine in 1969. 1970 Mach 1s used the 351C which is totally different. The GT350s are worth major bucks because any pristine Shelby is, but I get tired of hearing idiots tell incredible stories as to why these have the Windsor engine instead of the Cleveland!! They have the Windsor because their re-titled '69 models!!!  Just had to vent that. Mastermind            

Beware of what's written by self-proclaimed "Experts"....

If your searching for a musclecar you really have to beware of falsehoods out there that are perpetuated by self-proclaimed "experts". I grew up in the '60's and '70's, followed my dad into the car business and spent my life working in dealerships and speed shops. Often I was in charge of "PDI"-"pre-delivery inspection" of new cars as they came off the truck. The reason I bring this up is I almost got in a fistfight with a "Know it all" who argued with me that "Road&Track's" 1977 Road Test of a 400, 4-speed Trans-Am was wrong because the writer alluded to the car having a "Rock Crusher" 4-speed. ( If you don't know,GM musclecars used 3 Muncie 4-speeds, the M20,the M21 and the M22. The M20 was a wide-ratio with a 2.52 1st gear. The M21 and M22 were close-ratios with a 2.20 1st gear. The M20 and the M21 had helical cut gears which made for quiet running and smooth shifting. The M22 had straight-cut gears for additional strength. This is why M22s were only used behind L88 427 Corvettes, L78 396 Chevelles, RAIII and RAIV 400 GTOs and Firebirds, 455HO T/A's and GTOs, W30 400 and 455 Olds 442s and 302 and 350 Z/28 Camaros and LT1 Corvettes. Because of the straight-cut gears they were noisy, especially when cold, making a grinding sound that sounded like a kid's rock polisher. Hence the nickname "Rock Crusher". However, some of the buff magazines also hung this moniker on the M21, because it shared the same 2.20 low gear ratio with the M22. In reality, only an M22 is a true "Rock Crusher". ) Anyway-this clown argued that after 1974 Trans-Ams and Z/28 Camaros only used Borg-Warner T10s. He had obviously read this in a magazine. I explained that the writer for Road&Track wasn't wrong, that his test car very well could have had an M21 4-speed. Especially since my dad and I bought a barnd-new 1978 WS6, W72,400, 4-speed T/A in 1978, and I went to the dealership with him to order it, and saw the salesman look in th GM order book and put "M21" on the order sheet in the transmission box!. And when the car was delivered,we put it on the rack in our shop and it did in fact have a Muncie M21 trans, just like it said on the window sticker!! Now some other guys we knew also bought T/A's of this vintage, and some of them had T10s, and some of them had Muncies! I pointed out that except for Z/28's and L79, L46 and LT1 'Vettes, that the Muncies were used almost exclusively with big-blocks. If you had a 350 Camaro, Nova or Chevelle, or a 350 Firebird or LeMans with a 4-speed it was probably a Saginaw 4-speed, which GM used extensively from 1968-79. This guy got spittingly hysterical, quoting more buff magazine articles, and factory sales literature. I tried to explain that what appeared in early sales literature, didn't always make production. Here's a huge one. In early 1973 sales literature the SD-455 was listed as optional in the Firebird, GTO, LeMans, Grand Am, and Gran Prix models. "Cars" Magazine even voted the 1973 GTO their "Car Of the Year". However, we all know that the SD-455 had trouble passing emissions with the hot RAIV cam, which was swapped for the milder RAIII cam and hp down-rated from 310 to 290. They also trouble with connecting rod failure on early prototypes, and with EGR valve function. The engine was finally EPA certified in April 1973 in the Firebird line only. That's why only 295 were built-252 in Trans-Ams and another 43 in Formulas, all with April, May or June production dates.  This isn't an isolated example. Early 1972 Chrysler sales literature lists the 440 "Six-Pack" as optional in the Road Runner and Charger, rated at 330 hp, with 9:1 compression. Quite a drop from the 385 hp and 10.3:1 of the '71 model. However, they had trouble passing the stiffer 1972 emissions standards and the option was scrapped, leaving the 280 hp 440 4bbl as the top performance option. Rumors persist that 10 or 12 "slipped out", but I have never seen one, nor has one ever been verified by any buff magazine or Chrysler engineer, or build sheet.  In 1972 Ford offered a high-performance 351C in Mustang Mach 1s, that was a step above the 266 hp hydraulic-cammed 351CJ.  It had 8.8:1 compression, a hot solid-lifter cam, and was rated at 285 hp. It was only available with a 4-speed manual trans and 3.91:1 gearing. It was basically a detuned "Boss 351" which in 1971 had 11.3:1 compression and 330 hp. In early literature it was even called "The Boss". Ford later re-named it the "351HO". Not many were sold because people didn't know about them, and Ford didn't promote the option. I remember my dad PDI-ing one at Serramonte Ford in South San Francisco. It sounded nasty. In original 1964 sales literature the 442 option is listed as available on any Cutlass or F85 model including sedans and wagons. Again-no one has ever produced a 442 sedan or wagon, no build sheet for one has ever been discovered, and no Olds engineer or employee has ever verified one!  In 1970 the LS6 454 was supposed to be available in the Camaro SS and the Nova SS as well as the Chevelle line. Zora Arkus-Duntov, cheif Corvette engineer fully expected the much more radical LS7 to make production as the Vette's top dog, so the LS6 wasn't offered in the Corvette. At the last minute the brass decided to cut down on "model proliferation"-whatever that means-and the LS7 was killed ( It was sold in parts depts for years later as a crate engine ), and the LS6 installed in the Chevelle line only. That's why there were no 1970 LS6 'Vettes.  In 1967 Pontiac introduced the 400 V8 which had much better breathing cylinder heads than the '59-66 389 and made more power and torque even though it was only available with a single 4bbl. This was partly evolution and partly a GM edict to drop multi-carb setups. Zora-Arkus Duntov and Chevrolet defied the order having a 3-2bbl option on 427 'Vettes until 1969. Buick, Olds and Pontiac complied dropping their tri-power and dual-quad setups at the end of 1966. Since Tri-Power ( 3-2bbls ) had been a Pontiac Performance staple since 1959, the buff magazines howled to the high heavens. All the parts of the '65-66 setup were available through dealership parts depts and it would bolt up to the new engine. Some Dealers like Royal Pontiac would even have their service departments install it if you paid extra. So some clown's dad or older brother could have feasibly bought a new 1967 GTO with Tri-Power on it. But there was NEVER a factory built version!! In early 1965 sales literature,the 409 is listed as available in 1965 Impalas. However the much more modern, "Porcupine" 396 that was introduced in 1965 was the new "big dog" of Chevrolet Performance and the "W" series 409 was dropped. I personally have never seen a 1965 409 Impala, although some people claim that "a few" exist. ( Like 1972 440 Six-Packs ). If anyone can come up with a window sticker, or build sheet, or vin number verified by GM historical services, I will stand corrected. Otherwise I don't think there are any 409 powered '65 Impalas. But I could be wrong. The point I'm making is just because something MIGHT have been offered 40 or 50 years ago, doesn't mean it actually made production. So do some checking before you spend your hard-earned money, and don't take some lunkhead's word just because he has old issues of Car Life or old GM, Ford, and Chrysler sales brochures!!  Mastermind      

My favorite movie and TV cars......

A lot of magazine writers and bloggers write about the coolest movie and TV cars. Sadly-a lot of them are the same, safe choices. The Charger and the Mustang from "Bullitt", the Challenger from "Vanishing Point", the 'wicked "Two Lane Blacktop / American Graffiti" '55 Chevy, "The California Kid", the one-off manual trans BMW 733i from the original "Transporter", the nitroused Audi, from "Ronin", Vin Diesel's Chevelle and Paul Walker's Supra from the "Fast&Furious" series, blah, blah, blah. Don't get me wrong, all those cars are cool, but these writers are trying to put out what they think the readers will agree with. I think I'm a Maverick and an indivdualist, so here's my picks that I think are not only cool, but varied and eclectic, not cookie-cutter-oh, yeah you gotta include the "Eleanor" Shelby clone from the Nic Cage "Gone in 60 Seconds."  Here's the list in no particular order. # 1. '55 Oldsmobile 88 Coupe. Burt Reynolds had one of these in the comedy "W.W. and the Dixie Dancekings".  The movie was a low-budget comedy about a huckster-Reynolds-who managed a country music band with Jerry Reed and others. His ride was two-tone black and gold Rocket 88 with a custom horn. Very cool.  # 2. '57 Thunderbird. Robert Urich drove a red '57 T-Bird on the private eye show "Vegas". Dan Tanna was one cool dude. He had crossover episodes with "Charlie's Angels" and "Starsky&Hutch", carried a six-inch barreled Colt Python, and had the uber-sexy "B" movie queen- Phylis Davis ( "Sweet Sugar", "Terminal Island", etc ) as a secretary / sometime girlfriend. And he had a cool pad inside a casino. Anyway, I always liked '55-57 T-Birds. I know their kind of a mainstream choice, but I'm allowed a couple.  # 3. 1962 Corvette. Todd and Buzz ( Martin Milner and George Maharis ) travelled "Route 66" having many adventures in their cool '62 'Vette convertible. It may have been a '61; I'm not sure, but the '62 had the same bodystyle, and the mighty 327 was a big power boost over the 283, so I prefer the '62 model...With dual quads and....sorry, got off on a rant there. # 4. '71 Ford Custom sedan. Burt Reynolds "Whiskey Runner" from "White Lightning" has got to be the most badass 4-door sedan ever. Forget the Bimmers and Audis from the "Transporter" movies; this had a 429 and a Hurst Competition Plus shifted 4-speed, and with white-letter tires on Super Bee style black rims with chrome lug nuts,and loud exhaust, it looked and sounded like a mean Mofo. # 5. 1974 Pontiac Ventura. Roy Scheider drove a silver Ventura with moon hubcaps and chrome trim rings in the "Seven-Ups", which featured the best car-chase since "Bullitt". I had a Ventura that I stuffed the 400 out of my wrecked T/A in. It was a great sleeper. Most people thought it was a 350 Nova, and were greatly surprised.....I'd love to find another one. #6. '64 Cadillac DeVille Convertible. The Corvette based Kit Car / Ferarri Daytona Spyder replica that Don Johnson drove on "Miami Vice" got most of the attention, but I really dug the drop-top Caddy that Phillip Michael Thomas drove. It's timeless styling still looks good today 50+ years later. # 7. '73 Corvette. McGarrett's girlfriend on the new "Hawaii Five O" drives an Ice Blue '73. I always loved the '73 models for having the ducktail '68-72 style rear, and the urethane front bumper of the '74-79 model. Not only are they better looking, with catalyst-free exhausts they have much more power than the later ones too. I'd love to have either an L82 / 4-speed model or a 454 / Th400 model. I'm not picky. #8 '73 Stutz Blackhawk. This was Elvis Presley's favorite ride. He bought three of them between 1970-75. Based on the Pontiac Gran Prix chasiss, these were status symbols among celebritys in the '70's. Besides Elvis, Evel Kneival, Frank Sinatra and other stars had them. Rapper DMX drove one in the gritty crime drama "Never Die Alone." Dynamite if you can find one. # 9. '67 Olds Toronado. Killer "George Stark" drove a black one with a bumper sticker that read "A High-Toned Son of a Bitch" in the Stephen King thriller "The Dark Half". Still a great looking car, and with 425 cubes under the hood, they move pretty good too. And their front-wheel drive if you live where it snows. I love "traditional" musclecars, but I think these are cooler than the Chargers, Chevelles, Mustangs,etc that were constantly bombarded with. Mastermind

   

The saying about "Cubic Dollars" is still true...

Someone once said "There's no substitute for cubic inches, except cubic dollars."  It's still true today, and it doesn't just apply to engine building. It also applies to car restoration as a whole. A friend of mine recently inherited a '57 T-Bird. He's trying to sell it, and the highest offer he's recieved is $5,000. After seeing the car, I told him to take it and run. How can that be? You ask?  Here's how. Yes, an older relative bought the car used in 1965 and it's been in the family ever since. However-it's been in storage since 1989, and has rust, water, and fire damage!! There was a fire at the storage facility, and the facility's insurance company paid a claim, but the car was never fixed, the money is long gone, and the person who collected it is long deceased. Forget, Concours or show quality,-according to a reputable restoration shop in out area, to get the car in "solid driver" condition would cost between 30-40k. Here's the "Catch 22".  If my friend wanted a nice '55-57 T-Bird ( He doesn't, he inherited it, and hoped he could make a quick buck selling it ) he could easily buy a restored or well-maintained one for $30-40K!!  So, the question being, should he dump the car as is and take a $5,000 profit, or should he spend another $30,000 that he doesn't have-( re-finance his house to fix a car? Not a good idea. ) And then sell it and maybe only make 5K anyway?  Even if he made 10 grand or more on the eventual sale, he'd have to invest 30 and then wait several months to get his return. It's just not worth it in terms of money or time invested. This happens way more than you think.  I've touched on it before, but I think it's worth re-visiting. Here's some tips on how to avoid this pitfall. # 1. An Ultra-rare car missing key components is not a deal at any price.  Obvious examples would be any Hemi-powered Chrysler vehicle missing the Hemi engine, or a Boss 302 or Boss 429 Mustang missing the "Boss" engine. But beyond that, there are others that can be just as difficult and expensive to restore. What about a '63 409 Impala?  The 409 has been out of production since 1965. That's 52 years, and they were rare to start with!! Not like locating a '60's vintage 283 or 327, of which there were millions.  What about a Thunderbolt Fairlane, or a Super Duty Catalina?  Where are you going to find a 427 Ford or a 421 Pontiac in running or at least rebuildable condition?  Well, duh! You say. Anyone knows that. Ok, but lets say you want to restore something as "pedestrian" as a 340 Duster. The 340 was only produced from 1968-73, and they were fairly rare. If you find one in running or rebuildable condition, it's not going to be cheap. And that's just the engine. What if the rest of the car needs extensive work?  Like fenders or 1/4 panels, or a trunk floor? Interior work? Especially if your not a bodyman or mechanic by trade-most competent shops charge $100 per hr or more for labor. It's pretty easy to rack up a $10-15,000 bill on a project. Again-the "Catch 22". If you searched Hemmings, Mopar Muscle, or various sites on the Internet, I'm sure you could find a damn nice 340 Duster for 15 grand!!  # 2. There's other expenses besides the engine and the body. What about undercarriage or suspension damage? If your restoring a '72 Olds Cutlass, you won't have much trouble or expense, because GM "A" bodies- used basically the same suspension from 1964-77. Factory or Aftermarket, anything that fits the wildly popular Chevelle or GTO will fit the Cutlass. Great. What if your restoring a '68 Javelin AMX?  With a broken rear shock mount. Upper and lower, one on the body, one on the rear end?  Never mind price, where in the hell are you going to find a shock mount, or a complete rear axle for a '68 AMX??  Or a front or rear crossmember?  # 3. Everything is not a Chevy or a Pontiac. One of the main reasons for GM musclecars popularity is ease of parts availability and interchangeability. For example-Mopars have different front crossmembers and different Torsion Bars, for small and big-block engines,  And 904 and 727 Torqueflites have different bellhousing bolt-patterns. Not like just "dropping" a 454 into your 350 Camaro or Chevelle,over the weekend, bolting up the TH350, and driving it to work to show your buddies Monday morning!  And God help you if your doing a Ford. Unlike taking a 350 out of a '79 Suburban and dropping it into a '72 Camaro and not even changing the belts,or a 360 out of a Dodge Van and dropping it in a '73 Dart that had a 318, a 351C Ford has a different bellhousing bolt-pattern than a 302 or 351W. And a 351C in an LTD has a different water pump,power steering pump, fuel pump, and oil pan than one out of a Mustang, which is also different than one out of a Torino. A 390 out of a Mustang has all that stuff different from a 390 out a T-Bird, which is different than one out of an F100 Pickup!!  I'm not bashing Fords; I'm just telling you that swapping a 390 out of a T-Bird into a Cougar is going to be way harder than taking a 400 Pontiac out of a Catalina and dropping it in a LeMans or Firebird!!   # 4. "Build your own" or "Cloning" isn' always a viable option. I've talked about some that are-Shelby Mustangs, Yenko Camaros, Hemi Darts, etc. Their easy enough to do, and you can usually re-coup your investment if you don't go batshit crazy on the build. What if your dream car is the 20th Anniversary '89 Trans-Am powered by the Turbo 3.8 V6 out of the vaunted Buick Grand National? They were awesome performers- the GN powerplant made more power and weighed less than the LB9 / L98 305 / 350 Chevys-so they were faster 0-60 and in the 1/4, and handled and stopped better than the already stellar "regular" WS6 T/A.  How are you going to "build" one?  First off, a great condition '89 T/A is still going to bring a King's Ransom. Secondly-where are you going to get a complete GN powerplant and all the wiring?  GN's bring blood and a first-born child in any running condition above basket case. A wrecked one? Good luck. GN restorers pilfer those out of wrecking yards faster than a speeding bullet. If you "Gotta Have" a 20th Anniversary T/A, your better off just biting the bullet and pay the price for one. Ditto for an '85-'88 Buick Grand National, or an '84-86 Mustang SVO.  The same goes for lesser one or two year wonders. How are you going to find a rear spoiler or stripe kit for a '77 Pontiac Can-Am? A "Shaker" hood for a Ventura-based '74 GTO? ( Yes, any T/A shop has the scoop; I'm talking about a Ventura hood with the hole for the scoop already cut out. If you can't find one, how much is a body shop going to charge to cut the proper hole in a "generic" Ventura hood? And since their different from a '74 Nova, where in the hell are you going to find a "generic" '74 Ventura hood, if yours is messed up or missing? )  Where are you going to find a set of upright exhaust stacks for a '78-79 Dodge Li'l Red Express pickup?  Or interior or exterior trim for a '79 Chrysler 300?  Like I've said before, just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's feasible either time or dollar wise. Manned space flight is possible, but it's not cheap or easy! Mastermind