More Alternative bodystyle projects that could be way cool......

If your not restoring some "Icon" i.e.-409 Impala, Tri-Power GTO, Six-Pack Road Runner, etc-it might be fun to hot rod something out of the ordinary. Since doctrine doesn't dictate that it be all-original you could really do it up cool,while still staying basically "Period-Correct"-No one really wants a '62 Impala with an LS Motor, a 4L80E, and rack&pinion steering. Here's what I'm talking about. # 1.'60's style "Gasser" tribute cars. No one wants to cut up a '55-57 Chevy; I get that. But how about a '66 Tempest ( TEMPEST-not GTO ) with a straight front axle,radiused wheelwells  and a snarling 455 Pontiac with dual-quads on it? Or a '68 Chevelle-not an SS396-one of the 400,000 plus base-model Malibus produced that year alone-with a small-block with a blower sticking out of the hood or a Rat with a Tunnel-Ram? What about a '68 Farilane with a dual-quad 390, or even a 429 or 460 with a Tunnel-Ram?  # 2. Full-size NASCAR tribute cars. Before the GTO started the musclecar craze-the factories raced the big cars. Fireball Roberts and Smokey Yunick dominated with their fire-breathing Pontiac Catalinas; in 1961-62 they won 22 races. The famous '63 Galaxie fastback came when Ford engineers made a steel copy of the "convertible" roofline to make the car more aerodynamic for NASCAR racing! The famous "Daytona Mystery 427 Chevy" that later became the famous "Rat" motor was prototyped in a '63 Impala. High Performance Pontiac featured a replica of Fireball Roberts' 1962 Catalina and it was badass looking. I have also seen a '64 Plymouth Savoy done to look like Richard Petty's early racer-complete with a Mopar Performance crate Hemi. "Mustangs and "Fast Fords" featured a 1965 Galaxie that looked totally badass-with the radiused wheelwells, huge tires at all four corners, and a 390 with Edelbrock aluminum heads and dual-quads. These would be relatively inexpensive to build and would be unique. The later models-after 1965 would be even easier-a lot them had big motors and front disc brakes standard. A Rat-Motored, Nascar-themed '69 Impala would be way cool, as would a 429 / 460 powered '69 LTD, or a 440 Pymouth Sport Fury. # 3. Trans-Am tribute cars. The SCCA series started out a "sedan" racing. Here's what would be cool-no Camaros, Firebirds, Mustangs, or Challengers. How about a 1965 Valiant / Barracuda ( the one with the flat front end and huge fastback window ) with a snarling 408 inch 360 based stroker and radiused wheelwells? Or a '68 Dart with a 360 and a "Six-Pack induction setup?  What about a Ford Falcon with a 347 crate engine and a T5 5-speed? How about a '68 Cougar with a "Mock Boss" 302? ( Edelbrock "Cleveland" heads and "E-Boss" intake )  A Nova would be an awsome Trans-Am tribute candidate-any factory or aftermarket suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Camaro / Firebird fit them so you could really make a "g" machine out of one. How about a '71 Pontiac Ventura with radiused and flared fenders,a T/A style "shaker" hood scoop, T/A front and rear sway bars and fire-breathing 467 inch Pontiac for motivation?  # 4. '70's Pro Stock tribute cars. I know the "Pro Street" movement in the '80's and '90s got old-but I'm not talking about cars like Rick Dobbertins' J2000-tube chassised- monsters that cost over 100 grand to build. I'm talking low-budget. Like getting an early '70's Maverick,putting in a roll cage, radius the rear fenderwells to clear big tires and build a 302 or 351 with a Tunnel-ram and paint it like "Dyno Don Nicholsons'" famous racer. Or build a V8 Vega like "Grumpy's Toy" or a Mustang II like Bob Glidden used to campaign. There's enough of them built from '75-78 that have 302s stock, so they could be really low-budget. What about '75-79 Chevy Monzas and their cousins-Buick Skyhawks,Olds Starfires and Pontiac Sunbirds? Forget the V6 models; that's too much work. Get a 305 Chevy version and swap in a snarling 383. Any of these could be low-budget, cool-looking and wicked fast. Mastermind      

An "Alternative" Project Heavy Metal might be cool......

Back in the '90's Car Craft had a project car called "Project Heavy Metal". It was a 1965 Impala with a 502 inch Rat Motor,4-wheel disc brakes, a Hotchkiss suspension with front and rear sway bays, tubular control arms etc. It ran something like 12 second 1/4 mile times and pulled something like .080g on the skidpad. Awesome performance and handling for a 4,400 lb car. Sadly-the car was stolen and the Los Angeles Police never recovered it. Anyway-I'd like to do a similar project with a Buick, Olds or Pontiac, or even a Ford. Here's my choices. Let me know what you think, or if you have any other ideas. # 1. 1965-66 Pontiac Catalina, Bonneville or Gran Prix. These cars have great styling-the semi-fastback roof and "Coke Bottle" flanks still look good today. 389 cubes standard, and most have the bulletproof TH400 behind that. Or you could drop in a 455 and a 4 or 5-speed if you wanted to. Any suspension or brake upgrades that fit an Impala will fit these cars. These probably offer the most bang for the buck. # 2. 1966-69 Buick Riviera. These cars had the swoopy styling of the Olds Toronado but were still rear wheel drive. With 430 cubes and a TH400 for power, they moved pretty good too. Edelbrock offers aluminum heads and intakes,and Crane and Lunati offer cams. Or you could swap in a 572 inch Chevy Rat if you wanted to. How cool would that be?  # 3. 1967-69 Olds Delta 88 coupe. Swoopy fastback styling, and 425 cubes and a TH400 for power. Edelbrock offers aluminum heads and intakes and cams. Like it's Pontiac cousins-anything that fits an Impala will fit these cars-suspension and brake upgrades.  # 4. 1965-67 Ford Galaxie. These cars have styling very similar to the Pontiacs,luxurious interiors, and most have 390 cubes under the hood. There's a ton of speed equipment for "FE" Ford engines-aluminum heads etc-and theres a fair amount of aftermarket suspension and brake upgrades available. I think any of these cars would make a way cool project, and be a fun, fast, luxurious driver. Mastermind

Hollywood fails again...I have a "Need" for realism......

Took my nephew to see "Need for Speed" this past weekend. He loved it, which sums up the current state of affairs. He's 11. Apparently Hollywood has decided that the most valuable movie-going consumer is 12 year old boys. This was obvious during the previews. Yet another "Transformers" movie. How does Micheal Bay continue to "Fail Upward?" I thought "Pearl Harbor" sucked  15 years ago, and yet he continues to make megabuck blockbusters that make old episodes of Mission: Impossible or Lost in Space seem like "The Godfather" or "Gone with the Wind". And then there's "Brick Mansions" with the now deceased Paul Walker of "Fast and Furious" fame, some unknown european guy and Rapper RZA. I personally thought Paul Walker was a decent guy-he gave millions to charities worldwide helping abused and and underpriviliged children. However-he wasn't Al Pacino or Robert DeNiro, and he certainly wasn't a young Clint Eastwood or Sean Connery which is what the film makers have been trying to do with him since "F&F 1". 1st off- Clint Eastwood is 6'4" and is very beleivable as a tough guy for 50 years since "A Fistful of Dollars". Sean Connery is 6'3" and was Heavyweight Boxing Champion of Wales before he became an actor-and took a gun away from Gangster Johnny Stompanato and kicked his ass in a fight over Lana Turner. Walker was what 5'9" and 160 at his buffest? And 40 or not, like Ralph Macchio who was like 32 in the last "Karate Kid"- he looked 19. He's just not believable as a badass. Guys like John Wayne, Charles Bronson, Sylvester Stallone, Liam Neeson ( Another Wales boxing champion-turned-actor ) Russel Crowe, Christian Bale-all at least LOOK like at least once in their life they've hit somebody besides their little sister. Anyhow-"Brick Mansions" preview-yeah that's plausible-the cops would let a gangster take over an entire apartment complex and then wall it off and not let anyone in or out-and send in one man to bring it down. And Walker and the Euro-male-model looking guy fly through the air and do incredible stunts and kick a lot of ass. Except their putting a video game on screen. Why? Guy jumps six feet in the air, rotates his body clockwise, kicks three guys in the face,does a backflip and lands on his feet. Jumps a 100 feet off a roof, crashes through a window into an adjacant building and doesn't get a scratch. Riiigghhht. It can't be done, we know it can't be done,we know the actor isn't doing it, so why put it onscreen? Because your target audience is 7th graders who play "World of Warcraft".  At least in the old days if Chuck Norris or Bruce Lee or Jean Claude Van Damme or even Jackie Chan did something, it may not have looked pretty, but we at least knew that you had an actor / athlete doing something that 99% of the population couldn't do. Anyhow back to "Need for Speed". Aaron Paul- who was only ok in a supporting role on the critically acclaimed AMC series-"Breaking Bad"-gives a leaden performance as a race-car driver / ace mechanic who's unjustly sent to prison after his pal dies in a street race. His James Dean-"Angry Young Man" act gets old after about five minutes. And I know it's PG13-but with women who look like Sports Illustrated Swimsuit models doing everything but pull their pants down and bend over-his "Dragnet" style "Just the Facts" Ma'am" atttitude is maddening beyond belief. Even in the Disney G-rated "Little Mermaid" the fish even sang a song coaching the dumb-ass prince-"Kiss the Girl!!!" And the plot holes- First off-barring felony DUI- no one goes to prison for a car wreck. Especially if you weren't driving the car in which the death took place!!!  And-with all the "CSI" techno shit-the cops can't measure skid marks etc-and figure out who was doing what? Puhleeezze. And the car-chase action-Hal Needham ( director of Smokey and the Bandit ) Peter Yates-( Bullitt ) and Richard Sarafian- ( Vanishing Point ) are all rolling over in their graves. William Freidkin-"The French Connection", "To Live and Die in L.A." is vomiting day-glo. It's all CGI and mostly physically impossible. Especially when Paul does a "Dukes of Hazzard" style jump over rush-hour traffic in a 2014 Shelby Mustang. The struts would have come through the front fenders,the engine cradle would have dropped out, the airbags would have triggered,the fuel pump would have shut off-even if the driver and passenger survived the impact-the car would have been wrecked and undrivable. But they just motor on. Their's another scene where a helicopter lowers a cable that Paul hooks to the car-and the helicopter carries the 3,800 lb car across a "Grand Canyon" type abyss without crashing or damaging the car. Like I said- it's a mess with plot holes that you could drive a fleet of UPS trucks through. Anyhow-can we do a car-chase movie old-school-with beleivable action? It will fly-trust me. Especially if you give the audience credit enough to have the sense to not want "Grand Theft Auto" on screen!!!  Mastermind          

What part of "Clone" or "Tribute" are people not grasping?.....

I'm amazed when I talk to some people who want to buy or build a clone of something ultra-rare. I understand the reasoning-and I have no problem with it. I don't have $100k or more to buy one of the few 697 "Real" 1969 Trans-Ams that still exist. However-since Pontiac sold almost 120,000 Firebirds in 1969, it would be pretty easy to buy a base model and with the help of Year One and NPD-buy the hood,scoops and spoilers and graphics. Even if I had to pay 15 grand for a decent base car, and then put another 10 into it converting it to T/A status-25 grand is a lot more affordable to most peoples wallet than 100+. And when your driving it-people will still "ooh" and aah"-no one knows it's a fake unless you tell them. And when your banging through the gears and smoking the tires-are you going to be thinking about serial numbers? Probably not. And since it's not numbers-matching anyway-it doesn't have to original to the "nth" degree. If I built a '69 T/A clone-I might use the 350 V8 that came in some base models. Or I might use the 428 I have in my garage or stroke a 400 to 461 inches. Or I could do it up like a Trans-Am SCCA racer- flared fenders, roll cage and put a snarling, high-winding small-block Chevy in it as a Tribute to the cars that Milt Minter and Jerry Titus campaigned. The 303 Pontiacs weren't super reliable-and because some Canadian Firebirds had Chevy engines-the SCCA allowed teams to run 302 Chevys in Firebirds if they couldn't get parts for the 303 Pontiacs.  I don't need to search the galaxy and spend a mint looking for a 1969 RAIII or RAIV 400-because the car's a fake anyway!!  But 99% of the guys I talk to that are thinking of doing a "clone" or "tribute" car don't think that way. I spoke to a guy who was building a Cobra Replica-and was lamenting that he couldn't find a side-oiler 427 Ford for sale at ANY price!!! Are you kidding me? I asked him what he was thinking-Factory Five has a complete kit that sells for $19,995. It has the seats, guages,suspension, everything. All you have to do is add the engine and tranny-and the frame is set up to use a small-block Chevy, or a small-block Ford, or a 4.6 / 5.4 Ford Mod Motor. Just specify which motor mounts you need. Even if you spent 7 grand-say 5 grand for a 385 hp SVT 351W or a 400 hp 383 Chevy and another 2k for a Richmond 5-speed-you'd only have 26 grand in the whole thing, assuming you could do the labor yourself. Anyone who has a complete 60's vintage 427 Ford that isn't restoring a Galaxie or a Thunderbolt or a "Real" Cobra and is willing to sell it is going to want 15 or 20 grand for it, and then you may have to rebuild it!! You'd have more in just the engine than you would in the whole car if you did it with a 302 / 351W!!! And it's not real anyway. 427 or not, no ones going to pay you a hundred grand for a kit car if you try to sell it, especially when Factory Five will sell you a turn-key model for like 40!! I talked to another guy who wanted to build an AAR 'Cuda clone. He was whining that he couldn't find a 340. I told him-buy a Blueprint Engines 360 based 408 stroker from Summit Racing they have 375 hp and 460 lbs of torque and have a 3 yr/ 30,000 mile warranty-or if he wanted to build it himself go to the junkyard and get a 360. There's millions of them out there in Dodge and Plymouth cars, trucks and vans from 1971-1991. ( '92 and later "Magnum" engines use a different intake manifold ). Edelbrock still sells the "Six-Pack" manifold and Holley still sells the carbs. "But it wouldn't be correct without a 340." he said. "Duh!!" I replied-"It's a 318 base model that your tricking up!! "Nothing about it is CORRECT!!!"  "If you put a Mopar Performance 426 Hemi crate motor in it-it's cool, but it's still not an original Hemi car!!!  Anyhow-here's some good advice for you folks considering building clones. # 1. Any similar engine will do. For example if your building a Ford Thunderbolt clone, or GT500 Shelby clone-it doesn't have to be a 427 or a 428. A 390 looks the same externally and there were millions sold in various Ford cars and trucks from 1961-76. You don't have search the galaxy for a 389 Pontiac to put in that '66 Tempest that your making into a GTO. Something like 15 million 400s were produced between 1967-78. One of those will do. You don't have to mortgage your house to get a real "DZ" 302 Chevy for your '69 Z/28 clone. A 350 will do. Or GMPP will sell you a 4-inch bore 4-bolt main block and a 3.00 inch stroke crank, rods and pistons if you have to have an "actual" 302. #2. The same goes for transmissions. Don't search the galaxy for a Muncie rock-crusher for your Yenko Deuce Nova clone. A new Richmond Super T10 from Summitt will  do just fine. If your building a '64 Impala SS clone-you can use a 350 and a TH350. It doesn't have to be a 327 and a Powerglide with 1963 or 64 date codes. It's not "REAL" anyway!!!  So take the path of least resistance and less dollars spent. You'll be happier and have more money in your pocket, and if you ever decide to sell the car you might get all or most of your investment back. Which you won't if you go crazy making a clone "Correct". That's all I'm saying. Mastermind            

The "Good Old Days" were really good....There's no way you could do that now....

I lived in the golden age of musclecars and racing-the late '60s and '70's. Back then a lot of the "Stars" were still "Grass-roots" "Hometown" guys." Not like now. My dad worked in the same Chevrolet Dealership as Dino Fry-who is a legendary racing engine builder. My dad and I and Dino used to have lunch at a small deli across the street from the dealership that made awesome Pastrami sandwiches. Dino was quoted several times in HP books classic-"How to Hotrod Small-Block Chevys" which was published in 1972 and has had several updates since. He got me and dad to meet Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins when he came to town with his famous "Grumpy's Toy" Pro Stock Vega, and he introduced us to John Greenwood-the famous SCCA Corvette racer.  But he wasn't a celebrity-he was just one of my dad's pals. In my mind. The same for Dave Aldana. He was a factory backed Honda Flat-track motorcycle racer that fought Gary Scott-a Harley backed rider fiercely for the championship. Their duels at San Jose Speedway- the famous "San Jose Mile" were legendary-they became three-way duels when Kenny Roberts riding for Yamaha came into the fray. Dave had a Honda Motorcycle shop on Mission street, and my dad and I used to buy parts there for our dirt bikes. Since my old man was a master mechanic-he was a legend at tuning multiple- carb setups-people with Tri-Power Pontiacs and Six-Pack Mopars, and sports car guys with Porsche 911s and Datsun 240Z's sought my dad out to synchronize their Webers or SUs for track days. Dave Aldana had a Pantera and a friend of his had a Ferrari Daytona 365 GTB. ( The coupe version of what Don Johnson had on "Miami Vice" ). They wanted to race each other for big bucks on one track day at Laguna Seca. Not wanting a tuning problem-i.e. points, bad wires, bad carb jetting etc- to decide the matter-they had my dad tune both cars the weekend before the race. The guy in the Ferrari won, but just barely, and a great time was had by all. Thankful to my dad for tuning the cars-Dave got us pit passes to his next race-we not only got to hang with him, but we got to meet Gary Scott and Kenny Roberts and Dick Mann. When I got older and my family moved to Nevada my dad went to work in Bill Harrah's dealership that sold Ferraris and Mercedes and other exotic cars. I too, went into the car business and guy I worked with was Wendy Foreman's son. Wendy Foreman was Bill Pennington's cheif mechanic-if you don't know Bill Pennington owned the Circus Circus casino-and raced hydroplanes and boats and Lamborghinis. I got to visit Pennington's shop several times when they were prepping a Countach or a 'Vette. Besides Lamborghinis-Bill had a thing for Rat-Motored 'Vettes too. Me and Tim were just other gearheads that were allowed to play-partly because we knew the boss and partly because we loved the cars and the crew guys liked us. But nowadays racing is such big business-there's no way average guys could hang out with Jeff Gordon or Dale Earnhardt Jr, or Micheal Andretti-and be allowed to hang in the pits or the shop and eat lunch with them and have a few beers. Some Nascar or Indy league official would have to cite "Liability issues" and kick you out, or the race teams would be so paranoid that you were going to steal a secret or say something about tuning to a magazine or put it on Facebook that theres no way a "Average Joe" would be allowed into the inner circle like that. And that's sad. For example-Colin Kapernick-the quarterback for the 49ers went to UNR- and when he's in Reno he goes to my sister's church. He's a great guy. Always nice to people, willing to chat or sign an autograph for kids. My nephew think's hes the greatest. Which is cool-I liked Joe Namath when I was a kid and never got to meet him. But the way things are-even if he offered-which he hasn't-I'm just saying if he did-there's no freaking way the NFL or the 49er organization would let him take my nephew onto the field or into the locker room to meet the rest of the team. "Liability issues" again. It's sad-because when I was my nephew's age-I was in the pits at the San Jose Mile-screaming my lungs out for Dave Aldana-who'd been to my house many times-and when "Grumpy" ran at Fremont-I was there with my dad and Dino-while Dino helped Jenkins jet the center-squirter Holleys for sea level!! That's things from a bygone era that aren't going to pass this way again. That's what I'm mourning. Mastermind  

Cars that could have saved the day for manufacturers....That the Bean counters didn't believe in...

It's funny how automakers make the same mistakes over and over. As the phenomenal success of the Pontiac Trans-Am in the late '70's proved, and the Fox Mustang in the '80's and 90's, the "Experts" are almost always wrong. Performance car buyers didn't magically fall off the earth after 1972-the car companies stopped making cars that they wanted to buy. You can't say that "Smokey and the Bandit" did it for Pontiac. T/A sales doubled or tripled every year from 1973-1976. In 1976 alone nearly 50,000 Trans-Ams were sold. "Smokey and the Bandit" wasn't released until June 1977. Almost the end of the production year. Yet they sold 68,000 T/A's that year, a huge increase from the record year of '76, with very little help from the "Bandit's" box-office success. In 1978-the first year "Bandit's" influence could be felt-sales increased to 93,000 units, and and 117,000 in 1979. But only a fraction of those were sheep who wanted a car just like the movie. The reason the T/A was selling in record numbers was it literally had no competition. Like a judge or politician who keeps getting re-elected because he's running un-opposed. I personally love '70's T/A's I had two of them in the '80's, and I'm looking for another one. But the fact is-by 1975-the Challenger and 'Cuda were gone, the Road Runner was gone, the Charger was a re-badged Chrysler Cordoba, the GTO was no more, the Javelin / AMX was no more, the Z/28 took a 2 1/2 year hiatus ( from late 1974 to April 1977 ) the Mustang was more Pinto / Capri than Mustang, the 442 was little more than a tape stripe package that could be ordered on any 2 dr Cutlass,( even with a 260 inch V8 that wheezed out 120 hp. Great in a 4,000 lb car. And there was no manual transmission option. Even if you ordered a 350 or 403 you got a slushbox and 2.41:1 gears. Snooze.) The Chevelle SS was gone, and you couldn't get a Rat motor in a 'Vette after 1974. Only the T/A-like Buford Pusser standing up to corruption in the South-"Walked Tall". You could get a 455 with a 4-speed until 1976 and the 400 was available until 1979. If you wanted a sporty car with a big V8  you had one choice. Scoff now at their sub 7 second and 0-60 times and 15 second 1/4 mile times-yes I know a 2014 V6 Mustang is faster than that-but they were the fastest cars available at the time, and if it weren't for them standing Janus-faced-selling in record numbers while everyone espoused fuel-economy and front-wheel drive-we wouldn't have 400 hp Challengers, Mustangs and Camaros today. Ditto for the Fox Mustang. Ford realized they stepped on their dick with the Pinto-based Mustang II. In 1982 they brought back the 302, and the rest is history. Same thing-while it was rumored that the Mazda built front-drive Ford Probe was going to be the new Mustang- the nose-heavy, tail happy, under-braked "5.0" sold millions-outselling Camaros and Firebirds combined almost every year-because they were not only faster but several thousand dollars cheaper. Anyhow here's why certain divisions are out of business. # 1. Chrysler pulled the plug on the E-bodies at exactly the wrong time. GM used basically the same body for the Camaro / Firebird from 1970-81 and sold millions of them. If they had kept the Challenger / 'Cuda line beyond 1974-they could have competed with Pontiac and got a big slice of musclecar sales. The 440 was available in big cars and trucks through 1978-so they were smog-legal. Do you think a 440 / 4-speed Challenger would have competed with a '77 Trans-Am? Does a bear crap in the woods? And Like GM did in 1982-the F-bodies were downsized-but they were still V8, rear-wheel drive, and through the '80s you couldn't get a 400 Pontiac anymore, but the 305 and 350 Chevys moved them along pretty good, and they sold a ton of them. They could still used a 318. What did Mopar guys have?-the 4-cylinder, front drive Chrysler Laser and Dodge Daytona. Yeah, a guy who once had a 440 / Six Pack Super Bee is gonna lust after that!!  # 2. AMC stepped on their dick twice. First when they dropped the Javelin after 1974. Like the Camaro / Firebird they could have continued it until the end of the decade with minor changes, but they didn't. By '77 everyone realized they needed a Trans-Am fighter. That's why Chevrolet resurrected the Z/28, with great sales success. 1978 was the best Camaro sales year ever. The AMC engineers came up with an AMX package for the compact Hornet. It had special graphics and front and rear stabilizers bars-they handled good. Since AMC V8s are all externally identical and a 304 was an option in the Hornet-they wanted to take the 401 out of the big cars and put it in the AMX- a bolt-in swap-like a 350 Chevy for a 305. Since the Hornet only weighed about 2,900 lbs- a 401 powered AMX would have smote a 3,800 lb 400 Pontiac T/A in biblical fashion in a drag race. It may not have been sexy-but like the '68 Road Runner-it would have been lean and mean,and sold like hot cakes. The brass ok'd the suspension and graphics package, but nixed the engine swap-they thought people only cared about looks, not performance. ( Sure. That's why GM was selling Camaros, Firebirds, and Corvettes in record numbers ) The only engines were a 258 inch six or a 304 V8 with a 2-barrel that wheezed out 120 hp. And they wondered why they didn't sell. # 3. Pontiac did the same thing in 2004. The GTO didn't sell because it looked like a Grand Am with a spoiler. Car and Driver said it best- when they called it the "Best car nobody's buying". "It runs like a Corvette, handles like a BMW, and looks like a rental car." Now if they'd done what Ford did with the Mustang, Dodge did with the Challenger and Chevy did with the Camaro-make it look like a '60's or '70's model-they'd have had people lined up around the block. I guess they never learn. Mastermind      

More on the Mad Max Muscle Machines.....

There's a company called Aussie Coupes that will build you a Mad Max Interceptor. They'll locate a 1973-76 Ford Falcon XB coupe-( Ford sold 211,000 in Australia in those years so there's a good supply). They'll put the spoilers, flares, nose cone, and wheels and tires on it along with the "Zoomie" exhaust pipes. They'll paint it black and rebuild the engine, transmission, brakes, etc. They'll even put a fake blower on it driven by an electric water pump that you can turn on and off with a switch just like the movie car. The real exciting part is-if you want to pay extra-you can get a 4, 5, or 6 speed manual, or a 3 or 4 speed automatic, behind  any Ford engine you want-the 351C that came with the car or a 385 hp SVO 351W crate engine,a 351W based 427 stroker, a 302 with a REAL Roots-type blower rated at 470 hp, or even a 460 based 514 SVO 600 hp monster. They'll also beef up the suspension if you want-you can use a 8 inch, 8.8 or 9 inch Ford rear, depending on how much power you want and they even put Wildwood or Brembo 4-wheel disc brakes on it if you want. Your level of performance is only limited by your wallet and imagination. And they'll ship it to America and make sure it gets through customs legally. The base model is about 30 grand, and a fully loaded one-depending on how hog-wild you go with options can get up to 45-80 grand. But when you consider that a new Toyota Camry or Honda Accord costs over 30 grand, and that a Toyota Tundra pickup or Chevy Tahoe can top 50k loaded, I'd much rather drive around in the Mad Max car with 400+ hp and torture yuppies in Porsches, little boys in their Rice-Rockets and middle aged men in Hemi Chargers,Corvettes, Mustangs,etc. And look totally cool doing it. Far cooler than the cookie-cutter Pro Touring, LS engined old GM Iron that every buff mag has page after page after page of!!  And that's not all-they also offer the "Nightrider" car-the one Max and Goose were chasing all over the land at the beginning of the film. Same deal-they'll find you a late '70's Holden Monaro and put any GM engine in it you want-small or big-block Chevy, LS motor, backed by a TH400 or a 4,5 or 6 speed manual. They'll also build you one of the Yellow Police car replicas if you want, and they offer replicas of other famous movie cars-they'll build you a "General Lee" Dodge Charger, a "Starsky&Hutch" Torino, even a "Batmobile" clone if you want. They have a cool website that's very informative. Just type in Aussie Coupes, or Mad Max Interceptor on google and you'll find their site. Now if if I can get the H/O sold and maybe get a small home equity loan.....I can prowl Nevada's rural highways in a 500 hp interceptor hunting down 'Vettes, and Vipers,.....Mastermind  

Some "Rodney Dangerfields" that could make wicked fast "Rat Rods" for low bucks.....

Comedian Rodney Dangerfield always joked about getting no respect. There's cars out there that people treat the same way, but have great potential to be a hot rod if you can overlook their un-sexy exterior. Here's a few that I think have great potential. # 1. 1975-79 GM "X" body. This includes Novas, Pontiac Venturas, Olds Omegas, and Buick Apollos.  Everyone wants the 1968-74 models-especially the '68-72 Novas but these are actually a better deal. They-have power front disc brakes standard, and any suspension upgrades that fit a Camaro / Firebird fit these cars-so you could build an evil drag racer-or a corner carver that could torture 'Vettes and Porsches. This is the era when GM was playing musical engines-so a lot of them will have small-block Chevy engines which is if anything a plus factor. And with the right motor mounts the engine bays will accept just about any GM engine-so you could build a 455 Pontiac Ventura or a 403 or 455 Olds Omega or a 455 Buick Apollo. And like I said a small or big block Chevy would fit in any of them as well. Major Bang for low bucks. # 2. 1971-77 AMC Hornet / Gremlin. Don't laugh. With their short wheelbase and a curb weight of about 2,700 lbs these cars make dynamite drag racers. Forget the 6 cylinder models; find a 304 version. The 304 V8s can be made to run-but the real beauty of these cars is like Pontiacs-AMC V8s are all externally identical. That means a 360 or 401 is a bolt-in swap. 401s are a little scarce, but 360s were used in Jeep Grand Waggoneers until 1992 so there's tons of them in junkyards, and thers' good speed equipment available Edelbrock offers aluminum heads and intakes, cams etc. A buddy of mine built a 401 Gremlin in high school and he stunned a lot of supposedly "faster" cars-Camaros, Mustangs, Road Runners etc. # 3. 1970-76 Plymouth Duster / Dodge Dart. 340 versions are getting pretty high priced, but 318 versions are still cheap. These can really rock with the right equipment, or a 360 is a bolt-in swap. Mopar Performance even offers a crossmember and motor mounts to install the "B / RB" engines-i.e.-383 / 440s. I know a guy that has a Duster with a 505 stroker that runs 10s.  # 4. 1975-79 Ford Granada / Mercury Monarch. A lot of these cars have 9 inch Ford rear ends and 4-wheel disc brakes. Most have 302 V8 power, but a few have 351Ws from the factory. 2bbl carburation and salt-flats gearing made them slow in stock trim, but the possibilitys are endless. There's a ton of speed equipment for small-block Fords-you could build a 347 stroker with a blower if you wanted, or you could make a 427 out of a 351W. Their not sexy, but they have great potential and can be bought dirt-cheap. If you want a low-budget sleeper one of these might be the way to go. Mastermind        

If your going to drive the car at all.....Think carefully about what you really want....

For most of us a Musclecar is a toy. A 2nd or 3rd or 4th vehicle in the household that we take out on nice days to "Show-n-Shines" and the occasional weekend trip to the drags. Very rarely is a musclecar a daily driver-but some people like me-I put about 5,000 miles a year on mine. I don't drive it in the rain or the snow, but I'll take it out for a weekend cruise or maybe a day trip to grandma's with the kids in "Dad's Cool Ride"  (as opposed to the "uncool" Buick LeSabre I drive to work and back ). Anyhow-here's what I'm saying. If you want a $20,000 or 30 or 50,000 dollar piece of garage jewelry that's only driven on and off the trailer or to Concours shows, then buy whatever you want. But if your going to drive the car at all-even if it's only 3,000 miles a year-you might want to make some allowances to drivability. # 1. Transmission. If you live in a big city like San Francisco or Los Angeles, etc-that has a lot of stop and go traffic-an automatic transmission might be a better choice than a 4-speed and a heavy duty clutch. Yes, banging through the gears is fun. But constantly shifting in 25 mph rush-hour traffic is not. # 2. Axle ratio. Same thing-if you live in a rural area-like me-I'm 29 miles from Reno, 35 miles from Carson City and 25 miles from Fallon. 4.11:1 gears may give you great acceleration-but the motor buzzing at 3,500 rpm on the freeway gets old real quick. You might want to give up a couple of tenths on you 0-60 or 1/4 mile time to make the car more pleasant to drive on the highway-something in the 3.08:1-3.55:1 range will give you a good compromise between "jackrabbit" starts and highway cruise rpm. # 3. Comfort. If you live in an area where it's 90 or 100 degrees all summer it might behoove you to find a car with working or at least repairable air conditioning. Conversely-if you live somewhere that has harsh winters-unless the car is going to be stored inside from October to April-I would stay away from convertibles and T-Top cars. These tend to leak the elements into the interior and the heaters can't seem to keep the windows clear or the car even halfway warm. # 4. Don't get the biggest and baddest model-unless your primary goal is to show it, or race it at the pure stock drags or MusclePalooza. Let me explain-An older gentleman than came into the shop was disappointed in his Corvette. He and his wife wanted a C3 'Vette to cruise the wine country in and maybe to Lake Tahoe and back. In my opinion all he needed was a '68-79 model with an L48 350 and an automatic.He could have bought one of those in good shape for less than 10 grand easily, and it would have been dead-reliable, ran fine on 89 octane pump gas and gave him and his wife many hours of trouble-free cruising. No, he spends $60,000 on an 11:1 compression,solid-lifter L89 435 hp, tri-power 427 stingray with a 4-speed and 4.11:1 gears. He complains that it pings even on premium, gets 5-8 mpg, the motor is buzzing almost 3,800 rpm at 70 mph,it fouls spark plugs constantly and overheats in traffic, and his wife burns her legs on the sidepipes getting in and out of it. Well, Duh!!!  I'd love to have that car-because I'd put "KNGKONG" on the liscence plate, fill it with 104 octane race gas and go around every weekend giving the finger to Dodge Vipers and Porsche 911s, until I got my driver's liscence revoked. But that's me. This fella who was in his 70's-needed like I explained-a low-compression small-block model-or if he HAD to have a Rat motor-a hydraulic-cammed LS5 or LS4 454 with a Q-jet and 3.36:1 gears ( Plenty of those built from 1970-74 ). That would have been a powerful, easy cruiser that he wanted. Another guy did the same thing-he bought a 1969 W31 Cutlass, that the original owner had ordered as a stripped-down street fighter. Then he griped that although it was blisteringly fast- it was impossible to park and hard to drive at low speeds ( because it had no power steering ) and it was hard to stop from freeway speed ( it had 4-wheel manual drum brakes ) and the motor was buzzing at 4,000 rpm on the freeway. ( It had 4.33:1 gears.) He traded it to someone at a 442 / Hurst Olds convention and was much happier. The car he traded for was a 1970 Rallye 350 Cutlass-that had the "standard" 350 V8, a Muncie 4-speed, power steering,power front disc brakes, and 3.31:1 gears. He raved how this car was so much easier to drive and was still fast enough to be a lot of fun. Yeah!! That's what he should have bought in the first place. Which brings up # 5. If your going to buy a hot machine-like the GTO song-once in a while you have to "Turn it on, wind it up, and blow it out." I'm not saying run your car to 7,000 rpm constantly and risk throwing a rod out the side of a rare, numbers-matching block. I'm not saying that at all. But it won't hurt it to run it at full-throttle up a freeway on-ramp or down a country road once in a while-even say just up to 4,500 or 5,000 rpm. I see this all the time-especially with Hemi 'Cudas, Six-Pack Road Runners,Tri-Power Pontiacs and Corvettes,409 Impalas,427 Galaxies, etc. Their so goddamnded afraid of blowing it up or putting too many miles on it that they drive like my grandmother on prozac. The car never sees the high side of 3,000 rpm, or drives more than 5 miles at a time and never even really gets up to proper operating temprature. Then, the second it fouls a spark plug, they start screwing around with the carburators. Pretty soon it won't even start, much less run properly. If your going to drive like you have eggshells under your feet-go a range or two hotter on the plugs. If you do decide to take a road trip or go to the drags and hammer it-changing to the proper heat range of plugs is easy. But it's really much easier-to at least once a month drive it ten miles or more, and put your foot in it once in a while-that'll keep the valves clear and carbon out of the combustion chambers and the plugs from fouling. Mastermind          

Choose the right car to begin with....And you won't get disgusted and give up later...

I see so many half-finished or not even started projects that are often sold at a loss because their owners bit off more than they could chew. Here's some good advice on how to avoid this problem and make your project a success that you can enjoy. # 1. Be honest about your own abilties. Unless you are a bodyman or  mechanic by trade-It might behoove you to buy an already finished car-or one that only requires minimal work. Here's why- most professional restoration shops charge upwards of $100 per hour. And it's real easy to rack up 100 or 200 hours-especially if a car needs major body work or the engine or transmission rebuilt. Instead of spending 10-20 grand or more on a clunker that needs a major overhaul-you could have used that money to just buy a better car to begin with. # 2. Avoid "Problem Children". Even if you are a mechanic or bodyman by trade-I would avoid cars with major rust issues, frame damage, or fire or flood damage. It's a lot harder to restore a "basket case" than people think. Again-even if your an Ace Mechanic 99% of the time your better off just looking for a better car to start with. Which brings up the next point. # 3. The cheapest car isn't always the best deal. This should be a no-brainer, but people fall into this trap all the time. Here's a couple of examples-# 1. This guy wanted a 1970-73 Firebird to build a Trans-Am clone out of. I went with him to look at two candidates. The first one was 1970 Formula 400 that the guy was asking only $500 for. My friend was very excited. However-although the body was straight and rust-free-that's all it was-a body. I mean this was an engineless, transmissionless,radiatorless, gas tankless, interiorless hulk. The second one was a 1973 Firebird Esprit that the guy was asking $2,500 for. The vinyl top was peeling off, and the front seats needed to be re-covered, but the headliner and the rest of the interior was intact, the body was straight and rust-free, and it had a 400 with a 2bbl carb, backed by a TH400 trans. It started and ran like a champ,didn't smoke or leak oil, the tranny shifted good,the brakes didn't squeak, it was a solid car. I told him to buy it. He started in about the $500 one. "Look-I said." It'll cost you $10,000 to get other one in the shape that this one is for $2,500." This one is a screaming deal." How do you figure? he asked, dead serious. "Okay." I said. "This is a complete running car." "It already has a 400 V8 and a TH400." "All you really need to do is buy the spoilers and scoops, and the aluminum dash panel". And a 4bbl carb and intake." "The other one-you'd have find an engine and transmission, and crossmember and driveshaft,plus a radiator, a gas tank,the starter, alternator, fuel pump,power steering pump, all the brackets, the brake booster and master cylinder,the wiring harness,all the lights and bulbs, all the upholstery and little attatching clips etc. Just to get it in "driver" condition-which this one already is." "I guarantee it'll cost you $25,000 to build that other car the way you want-when you could do this one for 10, including the $2,500 purchase price." Don't be a moron. Luckily, he agreed-even though the '73 was five times the initial cost of the '70, in the long run it was the much better deal-going to save him thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of work. # 2. This guy wanted a "Vanishing Point" Challenger. He knew he couldn't afford an original 1970 440 R/T model-but he figured maybe he could get a 318 version and swap in a 360 or maybe even a big-block. Not a bad idea, entirely feasible. Except he gor fixated on his neighbor's car. The neighbor had a pristine 1970 Challenger-it was even Alpine white-but it was a slant-six model with an automatic, and 4-wheel drum brakes. I located a '73 model with a 340 and Torqueflite, that had front disc brakes,an 8/34 rear end and the Rallye suspension-i.e.-front and rear sway bars-and full guages. It had a little rust in the trunk-( What '70's Mopar doesn't? ) but nothing major and the body was in good shape-and the 340 ran STRONG. It would spin the tires as long as you wanted to stay on the throttle. It was red with white interior and a white vinyl top. The vinyl top was peeling off, but that's and easy fix-and the seats needed to be re-done. The guy was asking about the same amount of money as the neighbor was for the '70 model. Of course my pal was leaning toward the '70 model. I convinced him to buy the '73. I told him-"First off-the '70 is a six-cylinder model." Your going to need a V8 crossmember." "You going to need a new radiator-the slant-six radiator won't cool a 318, much less a 440." "Whether you use a small-block or a big block-you have to find an engine and all the brackets and accessories." "You'll need a new tranny-if you want to convert it to a four-speed you'll need the clutch linkage and pedals, the bellhousing, the shifter, everything." "Even if you want to leave it an automatic-the six-cylinder 904 tranny won't hold up to a hot 340,360,383 or 440." "The 8 1/4 rear end that came with the six won't hold up either." "The 4-wheel drum brakes won't stop it worth a shit either." "Not more than once." "Now-the '73 model already has a 340 and a 727-if you decide to drop in a 408 stroker-you've already got all the tin, all the brackets, and the proper tranny." It's already got an 8 3/4 rear-bulletproof." It's already got front disc brakes." "For god's sake, remove the vinyl top, fix the seats, paint it white and live out your Kowalski fantasies." It'll save you a ton of money and hassle in the long run." Luckily-he came to his senses and bought the '73. # 4. An ultra-rare car missing a key component is not a deal at any price. The obvious examples-a Chrysler Hemi car missing the Hemi engine, or a Boss 302 or Boss 429 Mustang missing the "Boss" engine. The cost of finding a numbers-matching or even-same-year engine and purchasing it and chasing all the parts would be so prohibitive that even if you had Donald Trump's bank account-you'd be ahead of the game and save many thousands by just anteing up for a complete car. # 5. Don't be a dumb-ass and fixate on one piece of equipment or go to insane lengths to get it. A couple examples-A Mustang enthusiast-who dreamed of a red-and-black '71-73 Mach 1 with the red-and-black interior passed on a pristine example because it had a two-barrel carb on the 351C!! I literally wanted to kill him. This car was beautiful and priced exceptionally low at $5995!! He kept looking, and paid $8995 for another one that a 4bbl on it!!!  "Are you insane??" I asked. You can buy an Edelbrock intake and 4bbl carb or like $600!!." "You just payed another 3 grand for the same car, because of a carb and intake??" "At least this one's original" "Yeah but an Autolite 4300 is the worst carb in existence, bar none!!" "The freaking two-barrel would ran better and been more reliable!" Another idiot passed up a prsitine, rust-free, one-owner '68 Charger because it had a two-barrel carb on the 383. He payed $5,000 more for one that wasn't nearly as nice-and here's the real kicker-this one had a non-original 440 in it with a Thermo-Quad!!! ( 1968-70 383 and 440 4bbl engines used Carter AVS carbs from the factory). The one that takes the cake was the two idiots who both had 1970 Firebirds. One was a Formula 400 with a 4-speed, the other one was an Esprit with a 400 and a TH400. They were both blue with blue interiors-the same color!!. These geniuses decided to swap transmissions. All of their friends said-"For god"s sake, just trade cars!!" "Their even the same color!!  No, these idiots spent two whole weekends swapping the trannys. Now neither car is original. How dumb is that? # 6. Don't be a moron about "Originality". Especially if the car isn't worth anything in the first place. If your restoring a Hemi 'Cuda-yes you want everything right. But a friend of mine who bought a '64 Buick Skylark convertible is much happier with his "restification" than he would be it it was "Just as it left the factory". He swapped the obsolete with no parts availablity 300 inch V8 and two-speed ST300 ( Read Powerglide ) tranny for a later model 350 V8 and TH350 tranny. This was a bolt-in swap, and the car has way more power and get's better gas mileage and has better drivability. He also put the spindles, front disc brakes,calipers, and master cylinder and booster out of a '72 Monte Carlo. ( '64-72 GM "A" body stuff is very interchangeable.) Now it's a helluva nice car that his wife loves as a unique daily driver. And honestly-he "compromised" the value of the car how? It's not a Z16 Chevelle that he swapped an LS motor into! Think rationally and you'll avoid these pitfalls. Mastermind        

Some late model "Oddballs" that can be way cool and lightning fast....

If you want a cool driver / hot rod and don't want to spend 30 grand or more on a restored Chevelle, Road Runner, GTO etc-there are some gems from the '80's and '90's that a lot of people overlook that offer major bang for low bucks. # 1. 1979,1983-86 Mercury Capri. In 1979 you could get a 302 V8 in a Capri, which was basically a re-badged Fox Mustang. It wasn't offered in '81-82, but the "5.0" package returned with a vengenance in 1983-these had the T5 five-speed stick, and a 600 Holley 4bbl on an aluminum manifold, and steel tube headers from the factory. The option was continued until 1986. Many Mustang enthusiasts say these carburated versions run better than the more sought-after Fuel injected '87-93 models. Regardless, they are a great deal and there's probably more speed equipment out there for Fox Mustangs than anything else on the planet. # 2. 1983 Z/28 Camaro / Pontiac Trans-Am. This is the first year the five-speed stick and the 4-speed automatic were available. LG4 base models are ok if you want to swap in a 350 or 383 stroker. The ones to look for are the L69 5.0 liter "H.O." models. These had a higher compression ratio-9.5:1 as opposed to 8.5:1, a hotter cam,and a better aluminum intake. This pumped up power by 40 hp-190 hp as opposed to the LG4's 150. With either the 5-speed or the automatic and 3.73:1 gears,these cars were surprisingly quick-Car&Driver's June 1983 test car laid down a 15.0 1/4 mile time-3 tenths quicker than the Mustang GT they were comparing it against. This package was offered through 1985-but was then overshadowed by the LB9 and L98 TPI engines. The other one to look for is the "Cross-Fire Injected" models. They were only offered with the 4-speed automatic; however with the 3.42:1 or 3.73:1 gears-these cars would smoke the tires easily in low gear and lay 8-10 feet of rubber on the 1-2 shift. A cheap way to have a great sleeper would be to buy a 350 short block from GMPP or Blueprint engines, or just rebuild one you have. Putting the 305 heads on the 350 block will raise the compression from 8.2:1 to about 9.6:1. The induction system can feed a 350 or even a 383-just use replacement 454 truck throttle bodies and Hypertech Corvette 350 Prom chip. This would easily be high-torque, fun cruiser that could surprise a lot of supposedly "faster" cars. # 3. 1984-86 Ford Mustang SVO. These cars had 4-wheel disc brakes,16" wheels with 50 series VR rated tires, Recaro seats,and turbocharged 4-cylinder engine that made between 175 and 205 hp depending on year. They didn't sell a lot of them because the "5.0" V8 models were both faster and several thousand dollars cheaper. However-they can be bought quite reasonably today, and the 2.3 liter Ford 4-cyl bottem end is bulletproof-you could turn the boost up and add nitrous and really rock. # 4. 1988-92 Pontiac Firebird Formula. For some reason in these years-if you wanted a Tuned-Port injected 305 or 350 in a Camaro you had to buy a Z/28 or an IROC-Z. Base model and RS Camaros got the carburated LG4 or a throttle body injected 305 that wheezed out 165 hp. Conversely-Pontiac was just the opposite-you didn't have to spring for a Trans-Am to get the high performance engines. You could get the TPI LB9 305 or L98 350 ( basically the 'Vette motor ) in a Formula. LB9 models have either a 5-speed stick or a 4-speed automatic, 350s are only available with the automatic. However-these are the ones to have-they ran sub 6-second 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times in the high 14s bone-stock. They were rated at 240 hp; you can increase that by 100 hp easily and stay emissions legal with simple bolt-on parts. Dynamite if you can find one. # 5. 1994-95 Ford Mustang GT. For these two years only-the Mustang had the "New" bodystyle that was used from 1994-2004; and the "Old" 302 V8 from the '93 and earlier models. 1996 and later models with the 4.6 mod motor were rated at the same 215 hp-but they didn't have nearly as much bottom-end torque and weren't as quick. Magazine road tests of the day bore this out. The upside for today's buyer is there is a ton of speed equipment for small-block Fords,and it's way cheaper than the stuff for the later 4.6's that don't run as good as the "5.0" stock or modified. # 6. 1989 20th Anniversary Trans-Am. You'll have to pay a King's Ransom for one of these-but their worth it. GM took the great handling WS6 Trans-Am chassis and yanked out the 305 Chevy V8 and replaced it with the awesome Turbocharged V6 from the Buick Grand National. The car was not only way faster with the badass GN powerplant-they handled even better becuase the V6 was much lighter than the V8. Awesome if you can find one and afford the pricetag. Mastermind  

Magazine Road Test "Ringers" again.....

The current issue of Musclecar Review touched on this subject. Several reader's had written in and asked why MCR didn't rank musclecars according to the Road Tests of the day. The editor responded that the results were wildly inaccurate because of the disparity of options on the cars, and the fact that many magazines modified the cars-i.e. re-curved the distributors, bumped the timing, re-jetted the carbs, some even added headers and traction bars and slicks. So what "Hot Rod" or "Car Life" ran with a particular car isn't really indicative of what a showroom stock example would have run. And, it wasn't just a couple of examples-it was and still is rampant. Here's a few of my personal favorites. # 1. 1964 Pontiac GTO. 40 years later Jim Wangers finally admitted what we already knew. Car&Driver's May 1964 test car that ran a blistering 4.6 second 0-60 time and a 13.10 second 1/4 while smoking the 7.75X14 Uniroyal Tiger Paws all the way down the track was a ringer. Royal Pontiac had not only replaced the 389 V8 with a 421, they had added thin head gaskets to up compression,added screw in studs and locknuts to get more rpm on the top-end,re-curved the distributor, re-jetted the 3-2bbl carbs, and replaced the stock vacuum throttle linkage with mechanical. No wonder no stock GTO or other magazine test car couldn't come close to these figures. # 2. 1969 Z/28 Camaro. Hot Rod's goal was to get the Z/28 into the 12s, and they barely missed it. However-the blistering 13.11 1/4 mile time was acheived by adding headers, re-jetting the carb,adding slicks and traction bars,and swapping the standard 3.73:1 axle ratio for 4.88:1s. Wonder why production examples could only run mid-14s?  # 3. 1969 440 "Six-Pack" Road Runner. Chrysler advertised this test done by Car Life of a "Prototype" 440 / 6. The car ran a string of very low 13 and very high 12 second 1/4 mile times. Except the "Prototype"'s 440 had been "Brought to the Top of Specifications"-the distributor custom curved, and the 3 carbs custom-jetted, and it had a 4-speed,4.30 gears, a pinion snubber, slicks, and was piloted by Pro Stock Drag Racing Champion Ronnie Sox of "Sox&Martin" fame!!  No wonder that Hot Rod's Super Bee test car a few months later was quite a bit slower-turning in a 13.56. That's still quick-but nowhere near the 12.80's that Sox was laying down!!  # 4. 1973 SD-455 Trans-Am. This is the car that Hot Rod ran a blistering 13.54 with, ( Only one-tenth slower than the 13.44 turned in by the 1970 LS6 454 Chevelle that HR tested in June 1970? ) and Car&Driver ran a 13.75 with. It's an early prototype, and in the pictures the "Shaker" hood scoop has standard "455" emblems on it, instead of the correct "SD-455" ones. And the Michigan liscence plate number is the same. We know it's a ringer because although both of these road tests were published in the April or May 1973 issues-the tests were actually done in February. And it's a fact that their were massive problems-1st with connecting rod failures,then passing emissions with EGR valve function, and the inital hot, RAIV cam was changed to the much milder RAIII cam and he hp rating changed from 310 to 290 when the engine was finally EPA certified in April. That's why only 295 were built 252 in T/A's and another 43 in Formulas and they all had May or June porduction dates. Anyhow-at the very least this car had the much hotter RAIV cam in it, and the earlier "illegal" EGR valve on the manifold. Plus the "Shaker" hood scoop was opened up-indicating the carb jetting had been messed with. ( 1970-72 T/A's had a vacuum solenoid that opened the scoop under full-throttle acceleration. Federal Noise mandates forced Pontiac to seal them for 1973 and later-making the scoop basically cosmetic. We all know a lot of guys opened them up anyway.) Hot Rod also took the liberty of bumping the timing, adding some M&H slicks and putting a shift kit in the TH400 which bumped shift points from 5,000 to 5,600 rpm. This dropped their 1/4 mile time to a blistering 13.15. Which by comparison was 3 tenths faster than the 13.44 ran by their June 1970 LS6 454,4-speed Chevelle SS test car. I'm a Pontiac Fan, but you want me to believe an 8.4:1 compression Firebird with a cam with only .410 lift and an automatic with 3.42:1 gears is faster than an 11:1 compression, 4-speed, 4.11 geared solid-lifter LS6 Chevelle??? Herb Adams and the boys slipped this one by. All other tests of '73-74 SD-455 T/A's have them running low-mid-14s. #5 1991 Ford Mustang GT. Car Craft boasted that their "Stock" "5.0" Mustang ran a blistering 14.04 e.t. Every other magazine that tested one from 1987-93 was substantially slower. The fastest being a 14.72, the slowest a 15.29. Here's why-the CC test mule had a K&N airbox and filter, a Flowmaster "Cat-Back" exhaust,and the P225/60VR15 Goodyear Gatorback radials were swapped for 235/60R15 M&H Soft-compund drag radials and the stock 2.73 or 3.08 axle ratio was swapped for a 3.73:1 set. Not exactly stock is it??  # 6. 1993 Mitsubishi 3000 GT/VR4. This one takes the cake. Mitsubishi advertised in magazines that their sports car ran sub-5 second 0-60 times and mid-13 second 1/4 mile times "With a Professional driver, under controlled conditions." Here's the "Conditions"-the engineers had disconnected the rev limiter, disconnected the knock sensor,filled the gas tank with 105 octane racing gas, lowered the tire pressure to 15 psi all around, and had the "Professional driver" pop the clutch at 6,200 rpm and powershift at 7,000, which grenaded the $5,749 transaxle after 3 runs. Gee, why were production examples with a functioning rev limiter and functioning knock sensor, filled with 89 octane gas and 35 psi in the tires a full second slower? Why do you ask? Anyhow-bench racing can be fun, but you have to be careful quoting these old road tests. Mastermind          

More on overkill on Magazine Project cars and Reader's Rides.....

In the same vein of the last post-I don't know why people spend untold amounts of money on beef that they don't need. Some more examples-# 1. Why does every car featured in a magazine have to have a custom 9 inch Ford rearend? I mean honestly-In 40 years I have NEVER,EVER seen anyone break a Chrysler 8 3/4 rear under any circumstances!! I have a friend that has a Duster with a 505 inch engine with nitrous that runs low 10's. He's never had a problem with the rear end. Does that 1/4 inch on the ring gear really make that much difference? Ditto for GM cars. And I'm not talking about the vaunted "12 bolt" that was in late '60's and early '70's models. I'm talking about the 10 bolts with an 8.5 inch ring gear that was used from 1970-81 in Camaros and Firebirds, from '68-82 in Corvettes, and from '71-77 in "A" bodys and '71-79 in "X" bodys. I have had 455, 4-speed Trans-Ams that I popped the clutch at 4,000 rpm on regularly and never had an ounce of trouble with the rear end. I know guys with L88 427 'Vettes with a 4-speed and 4.56 gears that drop the clutch at 4,500 rpm and shift at 6,800-7,000 and have never broke the rear end. A buddy who lived in San Francisco and had a '70's Z/28 Camaro and lived on a hill would roll backward out of his driveway-and with the car still rolling backwards, drop the clutch at 3,500-4,000 rpm and smoke the tires all the way up the hill!! I know a guy that has an LS6 454 in a Nova with 5.14 gears that runs 11.01 in the 1/4 with drag radials and he hasn't broke the 10 bolt rear. You can buy C-clip eliminator kits that will keep the axle from coming out if it does break, but you'd have to have a mega-hp engine with wrinklewall slicks bolted to the rims,and traction bars and drop the clutch or release the trans-brake at 5,000 rpm or more to break one of these. It's nice that Currie builds these with GM and Mopar mounting points-if you have to have the best of everything-but unless you've got more than 600 hp-you don't really need it.  # 2. Transmissions. I know guys that have put 400 hp 383s in '80's Camaros with T5 5-speeds that lasted 13 months with him doing 30 hard passes a weekend at his local drags. If it had been a normal driver it probably would have lasted 5 years. I know guys with "5.0" Mustangs that are running 10s with nitrous and have not blown their T5 trannys that supposdly only have a 300 lb torque rating. I wouldn't put one behind a Rat motor-but for  the average 350 or 383 street motor-you should be fine. Buick Grand National racers run 11s with 200R4's. They like them because theirs not as much "drop" between 1st and 2nd gear. I know guys with RAIV 400 Pontiacs backed by 200R4s that run 12s with street tires. I know guys with 500 hp 351 Fords backed by C4s. I get tired of them listening to people that "Need" TH400s,727 Torqueflites, etc. # 3. Valvetrain and bottom end. I get tired of "Gotta haves". Yes if your building a NASCAR Nextel cup engine that has to go 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona, then yes, you need all the beef you can get. But otherwise-no. For example-everyone says you need screw-in rocker studs on a high-performance engine. I know guys that have run small-block Chevy and Ford engines in "Hobby Stock" "Street Stock" and "Super Stock" circle track and 1/4 mile classes for 20 years that have NEVER had a stud pull out of a head. I've seen broken pushrods and broken rocker arms, and broken timing chains, but I have NEVER seen a stud pull out of a head!!  The same with cranks. Bob Glidden and Dyno Don Nicholsen ran 9 second 351C powered Pro Stock cars in the '70's and '80's with stock nodular iron cranks, because neither Ford nor anyone else offered a forged crank!! Bud Moore and Bobby Isaac ran a 351C Torino in Nascar that went 7,600 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona with a stock crank. What I'm saying is-don't buy into the "Gotta Haves" that magazines push to stay in business-they have to sell their advertisers products. Mastermind      

Why do people have to have technology just for technologies sake?? At triple the cost of something that works!!!

I see an alarming trend not only in Buff Magazine project cars but also in "Reader's Rides" that are featured. These cars have to have the newest and most expensive thing out there, even if it offers LESS horsepower and performance than something "Old School". # 1. Aftermarket Fuel Injection Systems. I'm not talking about larger throttle bodies or ported manifolds that Edelbrock,Trick Flow, Accel and Ford SVT offer-these are upgrades that work in conjunction with the factory system on 5.0 / 4.6 Mustangs,TBI / TPI 305 and 350 Chevys, 318 and 360 Dodge "Magnum" V8s, etc. These are all reasonably priced upgrades-usually a couple hundred bucks-that offer a 20+hp gain-a lot of bang for the buck. No, I'm talking about complete fuel-injection systems. Most of these cost over $3,000!!!. High-Performance Pontiac Magazine tested one on a hot 455 Pontiac engine. Yes, once they got it dialed in it worked great. Except-it cost $3895 and made 15 hp and 18 lbs ft of torque LESS than the $600 Performer RPM / 850 Holley combo it replaced!!!  This is not an isolated example. The Edelbrock Pro-Flow system costs $3349 for a small-block Chevy!. The Ford and Mopar systems are even more. And simply look in a Summitt Racing catalog-an Edelbrock manifold for most vehicles is priced between $200 and $350. A Holley or Edelbrock 4bbl carb, depending on model is usually between $299 and $450. So why would you spend $3,500 or more on a fuel injection system that doesn't make any more power than a $600 or $700 carb and intake combo-and requires a ton of electronics-installing O2 sensors etc, a laptop to map the fuel curve, etc-a lot more trouble than bolting on a carb and intake and maybe changing jets a couple times?  #2. Roller cams. Again-if you have a 1987 and later engine that came with a roller cam from the factory-that's the only way to fly. What I'm talking about is converting older engines. On the same 455 Pontiac that they tested the injection setup on, HPP also converted it to a hydraulic roller cam-at a cost of $1,800. Why? Especially when a Crane Energizer kit or Edelbrock Performer RPM kit is only $239??!!  And guess what-it was still redlined at 5,800 rpm-it's not like the roller setup magically allowed it to rev to 7 grand. Super Chevy tried hopping up a 454 HO crate engine that had a roller cam-and had valve float problems as low as 5,400 rpm!! The reason is the roller valvetrain is way heavier than a flat-tappet setup. That's why NASCAR runs flat-tappet cams to this day. Even for a pre-1986 Small-Block Chevy-generally the cheapest and most prevalant thing when it comes to aftermarket parts-converting one of these to a roller setup costs over a grand. And doesn't make enough power to justify the expense. Put that extra money into a carb and intake, or gears or a higher stall converter. # 3. Aluminum Heads. Don't get me wrong-these can be a great investment if your building a mega hp engine. But-for anything other than a small-block Chevy-a set of Edelbrock or Trick Flow or Brodix heads is usually priced at $2,000 or more. Let's say you have a typical '70s 351C Mustang or 400 Firebird. Assuming you can do the labor yourself-for 2 grand you can buy a set of headers, an Edelbrock carb and intake combo and matching cam,a higher-stall speed torque converter and some 3.73 gears and a pair of Drag radials to put all that newfound power to the ground. A lot more bang for the buck than bolting some expensive heads on an otherwise stock engine. And I've seen guys spend big bucks on expensive crate engines that are pretty hopped up to begin with. Hot Rod was playing with a ZZ4 Chevy 350. They experimented with different carbs and intakes and cams. Then they spent $1,400 on a set of Trick Flow heads. Why? The ZZ4 had aluminum L98 heads on it stock!!  And here's the real kicker-the "Antiquated" L98 heads were within 5 hp and 5 lbs of torque at every RPM up to 4,600!! In fact the TF's only showed a 30 hp gain in a 1,300 rpm window-between 4,800-6,100 rpm. Now think of this-honestly on your daily driver or weekend cruiser how often are you going to be between 4,800 and 6,100 rpm? And even if it's a strictly a hot rod-you only run it at the weekend drags-you can gain a lot more than 30 hp in a 1,300 rpm window for $1,400!! My first thought is you can buy a first-class Nitrous system that will give you an extra 250 hp on demand for a lot less than $1,400. Super Chevy was working on a ZZ440 454 engine. Now these are rated at 440 hp and 500 lbs of torque. They have Oval-Port aluminum heads from the factory. They put a bigger cam in it and by playing with carb jetting they got it up to 500 hp. Then "Just for Giggles" they decided to try some Edelbrock Performer RPM heads. Why? These were oval port heads just like was on the engine. I could kind of see it if they went with a huge cam and Rectangular port Victor heads-you want to rev to 7,500 and make power all the way there. Needless to say they were disappointed. The Edelbrock Heads only made 10-15 more hp than the factory heads-above 5,000 rpm. That's not a noticeable gain without a dyno. Think about it-all other things being equal is a car with 510 hp really going to go any faster than a car with "only" 500?? Dont' get me wrong, I'm not saying don't buy aftermarket heads-they are a great deal for some people and offer a lot of bang for the buck. Just not in every single case. That's all I'm saying. # 4. Aftermarket 4-wheel disc brake systems. Why does every car have to have a Wildwood or Baer brake system worthy of a Formula One car? Are the magazines saying that the front disc / rear drum or 4-wheel disc setups on most 70's, 80s and '90s cars aren't adequate to safely stop the car in daily driving or on a weekend trip to the drags? Puhllleeezzze. Even if your autocrossing it or running it at "Track Day" at a local speedway-you don't need a $4,000 aftermarket setup with six-piston calipers and cross-drilled rotors etc. I had a friend who used to autocross his '78 Trans-Am, and later his '86 IROC-Z Camaro. We found by using Bendix D52 or D154 "Police Spec" semi-metallic pads and DOT 5 fluid-that the brakes wouldn't fade. Even when doing back-to-back events with less than five minutes down time between them. The major problem was the DOT 3 fluid would boil. Ditto for a guy running a '78 Camaro in a NASCAR circle track "Super Stock" class. If we used the Police spec pads and DOT 5 fluid-even on a 50-lap main event-his brakes never faded. Some times at the end of a race the front rotors would be glowing red-but the car still stopped perfectly every time he hit the brakes. Don't get me wrong-I'm all for safety-I had a couple of harrowing experiences in my 400 powered '72 Ventura that had 9 inch drum brakes all the way around-I hadn't gotten around to installing Firebird spindles and rotors yet!!  But honestly-anything built after 1967 that has factory front disc brakes is going to fine for 99% of the people who drive them. Unless your building a 600hp monster that you intend to hammer constantly-the factory brake system on your Mustang, Charger, Chevelle, Firebird, whatever is more than adequate. That's all I'm saying. If you want a brake system worthy of a NEXTEL Cup Daytona 500 car and can afford it, by all means do it. But you don't really NEED it. Mastermind        

A clone doesn't have to be correct to the nth degree....

Talked to a couple people who wanted to restore some early '60's GM cars. I've said it before-I don't understand why people are so concerned with what a car might be worth if or when they get rid of it! Especially if it's not anything special-i.e.-a '64 Tempest with a 326 as opposed to a Tri-Power GTO. Anyhow I think I gave these guys good advice that I'll share here. The first guy had bought a '62 Pontiac Catalina with a 389 2bbl engine and the "Slim-Jim" hydro-matic transmission. He couldn't decide if he wanted to make it a nice cruiser or a "Super Duty" clone. I told him it would be easy either way. If he wanted a nice cruiser I'd get a 400 and a TH400 out of a later model Pontiac. You'd have to move the crossmember back and shorten the driveshaft but that's easy. You can use the stock shift linkage-they have the same number of detents-but you have to remember that reverse is now low. I'd use an Edelbrock Performer intake and 750 cfm carb-( They are an exact replica of the Carter AFB that came originally on the car ) and the matching cam. This setup has 15 inches of vacuum at idle and makes over 400 lbs of torque according to Edelbrock. This would move the big Cat along very briskly-and have a glass-smooth idle and be dead reliable. If he wanted to go the Super Duty route-I'd still get a '67-79 400 block. Butler Performance and Scat, and Eagle offer stroker rotating assemblys-I.E.-cranks, rods and pistons and rings and bearings-that can make 433 or 461 cubic inches. Edelbrock offers a dual-quad intake that's an exact replica of the 421SD manifold. Depending on how radical you want to go-I'd use dual 600 or 750 Edelbrock carbs. I'd use the factory RAIV cam. Summitt Racing will sell you a brand-new BW T10 4-speed, and Ames Performance and NPD offer clutch linkages and pedal assemblys for '58-64 GM full-sizes. He asked-dead serious-"How hard is it to find a 421?" With 1961 or 1962 date codes? Almost impossible. It's a fake anyway, so who cares?  Had a similar conversation with a guy wanting to build a Thunderbolt Fairlane clone. He was distraught because he couldn't find a 427 Ford for sale at any price. I suggested he get a 390. There were millions used in Ford cars and trucks from 1961-76, and they are externally Identical to a 427 or a 428. Edelbrock claims 422 hp and 434 lbs of torque with their "Performer RPM" package and dual-quad manifold. That would turn a lightweight Fairlane into a rocket, and look right to all but the most discerning Ford enthusiast. "But it wouldn't be correct" he said. "The whole car isn't correct!" I retorted-"It's not a real Thunderbolt!!" "For God's sake!!". If you buy a Mopar Performance crate Hemi and stuff it into a '70 Satellite and Put an aftermarket Superbird nose and wing on it, it might be cool, but it's still not a Hemi Superbird!!!  Get over it, and have fun with the damn thing, it's not real anyway. Mastermind      

More A#$%holes of the Century......

A while back I posted a parody of Hustler Magazine's "Asshole of the Month" column. For those not familiar-It's pretty funny. "Asshole of the Month" is usually a politician or celebrity that did something incredibly stupid or hypocritical. Like the senator from Idaho who was vehemently opposing gay marriage and then got caught trying to pick up a guy in an airport men's room. Or the woman who founded Mothers Against Drunk Drivers taking a six-figure job as a salesman for Seagram's, or the Gun-Control advocate in Washington D.C. who shot an intruder in his house with an un-registered gun. The way this relates to musclecars is I spotlighted people who had ruined classic cars. No, this wasn't a why did you put an SRT8 Hemi in a '69 Charger gripe, even the magazines featuring these cars wanted to storm these people's houses with torches. I won't reprint the whole article-but here's some highlights. The one guy had put a 389 Pontiac into a pristine 1957 Thunderbird. Blaspehemy most foul!!  The other guy had put the engine and drivetrain out of a 1998 Toyota Supra Turbo into a 1967 Camaro. Everyone wanted this guy drawn and quartered, tarred and feathered, and my personal favorite-entrails cut out and burned. Everyone was furious because he butchered not one, but two rare classics. Musclecar guys were mad about putting a Jap drivetrain in a classic Camaro, and the Import Tuner crowd was furious that he'd cut up a rare, valuable Toyota performance car. Well, I found a few more idiots with more money than brains that tops even these collossal ruinings of classics. These irritated the musclecar crowd and the classic sports-car crowd, and the Import tuner group. 3 for 3. Here's the winners of this month's "Asshole of the Century" award. # 1. This guy put a Mopar Performance 528 inch crate Hemi into a 1972 Ford Pantera!!!  Why???  First off-you can't buy a decent Pantera for less than 25 or 30 grand. Secondly-their pretty damn good performers stock-the mid-engine 351C Ford V8 pushes the swoopy 3,000 lb cars to 0-60 times in the 5 second range and a top speed over 140 mph. If you want to go faster than that-there's tons of hot rod parts for 351C's-aluminum heads,intakes, cams etc-or a 429 / 460 Ford has the same bellhousing bolt pattern and is almost the same size externally. So why would you spend 30K for a pristine Pantera, another 20K for a Mopar Crate Hemi, and then untold hours and dollars making it fit?  Ford guys, Mopar guys, and Sports car guys all hated this one. # 2. This genius put a 302 Chevy out of a 1969 Z/28 into a 1971 Porsche 914 / 6!!  Porschephiles lost their mind, and rightfully so. Everyone loved the cute little 914 Targa Coupes that were made from 1970-76 and even with a 4-banger they were a blast to drive. However in '70 and 71 a few were built with the 6-cylinder 911 motor which made them rockets. Except for a 550 Spyder like James Dean got killed in, or a '69-73 911S, the 914 / 6 is about the most desirable and collectible Porsche around. Butchering it with an american V8 wasn't enough-a 302 Ford or garden-variety 350 Chevy, oh no-this had to be a solid-lifter "DZ" 302 that someone would pay blood and a first-born child for to put in a '69 Z/28 they were restoring. And-here's the kicker-the car wasn't that much faster with the V8, and it handled worse!!! Because the iron small-block Chevy weighed WAY more than the aluminum flat 6 Porsche motor-and ALL that weight was unsprung on the rear end which drastically altered the cars weight distribution & aggravated the usual Porsche tail-happyness to an unmanageable degree!! If he wanted more performance-there's plenty of speed parts for 911 Porsche motors. Or why couldn't he buy one of the thousands of 4-banger 914s that no one cares about and drop in a 3.8 liter GM V6 out of a Buick Grand National Turbo or Pontiac Bonneville Supercharged SSEI  that wouldn't weigh any more than the Porsche / VW 4-banger and have triple the power?  # 3. This clown put a 350 Chevy into a 1988 Jaguar XJ/S coupe. If you don't know-the XJ/S was the flagship performance car-it had a V12 from the factory that moved the big cats along quite rapidly. And this wasn't Jehtro in the backwoods bought an old Jag with a blown engine,couldn't afford the $8,000 to rebuild the V12 and stuffed the 350 and TH350 out of his pickup into the car, no this Jag was a pristine, example with less than 50,000 miles on it that ran perfectly. The guy yanked the Jag powerplant that had nothing wrong with it, then went and spent a ton of money buying a TPI L98 350 and TH700R4 out of an '88 Corvette, spent several grand on Vortec heads,Edelbrock baseplates and TPI runners,and wiring up all the electronics to run the Fuel-Injection, moving the crossmember back, shortening and re-balancing the drive shaft, etc. And the net result-it got 20 mpg on the highway instead of 16, and ran the 1/4 in the high 14s instead of the low 15s. After he spent $12,000 and countless man hours and ruined the value of the car. If he wanted a nice Jag for a cruiser-he already had that. If he wanted a C4 Corvette for a hot rod-their the proverbial dime-a-dozen. I saw a nice one on a used car lot the other day for $3995!!  Anyhow-these people managed to offend everyone on all sides. Thought people might find it entertaining. Mastermind              

Luxury cars that have some muscle....And make cool drivers to this day...

The term "Personal Luxury Car" came into vogue in the late '70s but they've always been around, and some of these can be great fun, and bought for a lot less dough than "Regular" muscle machines-Chevelles, GTOs, Road Runners, Mustangs, etc. Heres a list of my Personal favorites. #1.1961-63,1967-71 Ford Thunderbird. A lot of people love the styling of the '61-63 "Bullet Bird" and with 390 cubes under the hood, they move pretty good too. The '64-66 "Thelma&Louise" model, I didn't like. The 1967-69 models had the cool hidden headlight bodystyle. I personally prefer the 2 dr models, but a lot of people like the "Suicide Doors" of the 4 door model as well. And they have 390 or 428 cubes under their long hoods. The 1970-71 models are my personal favorites. They have swoopy Nascar-inspired styling, and 429 cubes for motivation. # 2. 1963-65, '66-69 and '71-73 Buick Riviera. The 1963-65 Riviera was on of Bill Mitchell's masterpieces. The styling is still cool today, and with 401 cubes, they run pretty good too. Patrick Swayze drove 2 of these in the action flick "Roadhouse", and Nicholas Cage had one in the opening of "Drive Angry." The 1966-67 model had the swoopy fastback, hidden headlight styling of the revolutionary Olds Toronado-but the Riv's styling was cleaner and the car was rear wheel drive. This is one of the best-looking cars GM ever put out in my opinion. The '68-69 models are very similar-but the grille and front end was changed slightly, and are not as clean as the '66-67, but their still a great-looking car. 430 cubes backed by a TH400 all years,so they move as good as they look. The 1970 model was ugly and one-year only. 1971-73 is the famous "Boat Tail" design. 455 cubes standard all years. Like their ad used to say-"Wouldn't you really rather have a Buick?" # 3. 1962-68, 1969-76 Pontiac Gran Prix. 1962-66 models have 389 or 421 cubes under their long hoods. They also have cool two-tone interiors,eight-lug wheels and many other cool features. 1967-68 models have hidden headlights and 400 or 428 cubes under the hood. Ray Liotta drove a '68 model in "Goodfellas". In 1969 Pontiac downsized them onto the "A" body platform and it was a runaway hit. While 99% of Monte Carlos in the '70's were small-block powered, Gran Prix's had 400 cubes standard all years and a fair number of 70-76 "SJ" models had 455s. My cousin had a 455 powered '73 GP in high school. It had power everything, and it felt like a GTO. She showed her taillights to many a supposedly "Bad" Camaro and Mustang. # 4. 1969-72 Plymouth Sport Fury. These have cool styling and 383, 400 or 440 cubes under the hood. Peter Graves drove one on "Mission: Impossible". #5 1967-73 Mercury Cougar. While most Mustangs of this vintage are base models, Cougars usually have much more cool options like upgraded leather interiors, front disc brakes, bigger motors, and factory air. I personally think the 1967-68 models are one of the best-looking cars Ford ever built. 289, 302 or 390 cubes are your engine choices, and you really can't go wrong with any of them. 1969 and 70 models had similar styling, but were a little bigger. Engine choices are a 351W, 390 or a 428. 428 models will be overpriced, but you can still get a deal on 351 and 390 models. 1971-73 models had classy, but racy styling, and most had 351C's for power. I guess maybe because they were originally sold to older people Cougars are usually better maintained, and can usually be bought cheaper than a same-year Mustang. Any of these are cool choices-much better than the "Rich Corinthian Leather" and "Lean Burn" choked Chrysler Cordobas pitched as "Personal Luxury Coupes". Mastermind    

How to get maximum performance from your Musclecar....Even if it's bone-stock...

I talk to a lot of people who don't want to modify their musclecars, but complain that they don't run as well as they'd like, or that they got their doors blown off by a supposedly "slower" car. There are several causes of this problem. I'll list each one, and tell you how to fix them. # 1. Do a compression test. Even an 8:1 "smog" motor will have 120-130 lbs of compression. Higher compression engines may have 150-175 lbs. ( Ultra-high compression engines like a 12.5:1 L88 Chevy can have as much as 220 ). The readings should be consistent for all 8 cylinders-within 5-10 lbs of each other. If one or more cylinders reads 80-90 lbs you could have a blown head gasket or bad piston rings. You'd be amazed at the number of musclecars running around on 6 or 7 cylinders. # 2. No high rpm power. I'm not talking 7 or 8,000 rpm; many cars don't have the valvetrain or bottem end strength for that. But even a 318 Dodge with a 2 barrel carb and 150,000 miles on it will rev to 5,000 rpm or so. If your car starts popping or backfiring through the carb over 3,500 rpm, or won't rev past 4,000 or 4,500-you could have a flat cam, or broken valvesprings, or a burned valve on one or more cylinders. You'd be amazed at the number of cars I see with $5,000 paint jobs that can't pull 5,000 rpm in low gear. # 3. Bad tuning. This one is the most rampant. Even on a stone-stock engine, bad tuning can cost you as much as 50 hp. You'd be appalled at the number of cars I see with $5,000 paint jobs and $2,000 worth of wheels and tires, and the vacuum advance on the distributor is unplugged or inoperable, the timing is way too slow or way too advanced,the carb is way too rich or too lean, the points are closing up,it has one or more bad plug wires,an exhaust leak and the owner can't tell you the last time he changed the plugs!! Trust me-you'll be amazed at the improvement in performance you get just by installing a new distributor cap and rotor, points and condenser, and plugs and wires, and setting the timing to the factory recommended degrees. # 4. Bad carburators. I don't mean jetted too rich or too lean-that's an easy fix. But I see dozens of cars with the floats sinking,bad accelerator pumps,warped throttle shafts,or baseplates,and massive vacuum leaks. You have to realize-the car is 40 or 50 years old. Parts wear out. If you have to have a numbers-matching carb for concours shows or if you want to sell the car someday to someone really anal-here's what to do to make it run properly and enjoy it. Put the old carb in a box in your garage, and call Summitt Racing and get a new one. For example if you have a '70 Z/28 or Boss 302-you can buy brand-new 3310 780 cfm Holleys with GM or Ford linkage. I know the Pure Stock drags and many Concours show organizations are allowing the carb to be the original "Type"-in other words-the Quadrajet on your '68 GTO does not have to have 1967 or 68 date codes on it-it can be a Jet Performance or Carb Shop rebuilt unit. This good for cars with carbs that are no longer in production. If your a Mopar guy you can't buy a new Carter AVS 4bbl, but Edelbrock sells AVS carbs that look identical to the old ones, and work flawlessly and are available in 650 and 800 cfm versions-the old factory ones only flowed about 585 cfm. Ditto for Cars that originally had Carter AFBs-early '60s 'Vettes, '64-66 GTOs, and of course 409 Chevys, 421 Pontiacs and 426 Hemis. The Edelbrock "Performer" series is an exact replica of the AFB and is available in 600, 750 and 800 cfm versions. If your a Ford guy-and your car originally had a Holley on it your in luck-the original "type" rule again-you can put a 750 Holley on your GT350 or 428CJ Mustang- no ones going to ding you because it isn't a 715 or 735 cfm version with 1960s date codes. If you have the misfortune to have an Autolite 4100 or 4300 4bbl on your Ford, you'll just have to put it in a box, use a Holley or Edelbrock to make the car run properly and use the old one for shows, if it is a show car. But no one offers new or rebuilt Autolite carbs, and they were HORRIBLE when they were new. My dad was a Ford master tech in the early '70's and they had massive problems brand-new-they wouldn't idle, wouldn't start in hot or cold weather, had no power, and got crappy gas mileage. If you had a Mustang with a 351C or a T-Bird or LTD with a 429 or 460 and you bitched hard enough the dealers would install a 6619 600 cfm Holley and warranty it. When you install the new carb make sure the throttle linkage doesn't stick and opens all the way, and if you have an automatic trans, make sure the kickdown linkage is hooked up properly. This is a big one-I see cars all the time that the throttle will only open halfway or 3/4 of the way. # 5. Neglected transmissions. I see cars all the time with slipping clutches, or shifters that hang up between gears, or pop out of gear for no reason. Hurst offers a rebuild program-you can send in your old shifter and they'll re-furbish it and put new bushings and shift rods on it. I see automatic cars all the time that are running around 1 or 2 qts low on fluid, or haven't had the fluid changed in years,the vacuum modulator is unplugged or not working. Chane the fluid at least once every two years or 25,000 miles. Make sure the modulator is working, and install a B&M or TransGo shift improver kit. You'd be amazed at how well a car runs when everything is in proper tune and working the way it should. Mastermind

A car isn't rare just because the clown selling it says it is....

Talked to a disappointed man the other day. After our conversation he regretfully said he wished he'd met me or seen this site before he bought his car. I was as gentle and tactful as possible-I told him he should have maybe checked Hemmings Motor News or Musclecar Review magazine, or bought HP Books' "Guide to GM Muscle Cars."  He was proudly showing me a really nice 1967 Chevy Impala SS. It was a 327 / TH400 model, and it had bucket seats, a console and a tach, it was really nice. But when he started telling me how rare it was-I stopped him. "I'm not trying to be rude-but Chevrolet built 75,600 of these in 1967 and another 38,200 in 1968." "If it was a 427 model it would be rare-they only made 2,127 of those in 1967." "Your kidding." The guy said. "No I'm not." "Sorry. It's a really nice car, but the small-block models are not that rare or valuable." He swore a little, and I was shocked-the price he paid would be what a numbers-matching 427 model would be worth. That's where the term "Buyer Beware." came from. Do some research before you shell out big bucks for a car. This is not an isolated example. I've had similar conversations with other people over different cars; some luckily before they bought them, some sadly after. Here's a few samples. # 1. 1969 Firebird 400. This was a nice car, and it was numbers-matching. But Pontiac built 113,000 Firebirds in 1969, and nearly all of them had 350 or 400 cubes under the hood. And this car was a typical 400 coupe with an automatic. It wasn't a Ram Air III or a Ram Air IV with a 4-speed that would justify it's high price; I have seen '69 Trans-Ams ( and they only made 697 of those ) priced less than this car. # 2. 1978 Corvette. All 1978 Corvettes are "Silver Anniversary" models. They all have badging commemerating 25 years of Corvettes. ( The 'Vette was introduced in 1953. ) Now about 10,000 of them have a two-tone silver and charcoal grey paint job and silver leather seats, but their not that rare. Ditto for the '78 Indy Pace car editions. They were supposed to be exclusive-but their was high demand and GM decided to make one for every dealer. At that time there were 7,700 dealers across the country. And not every dealer was slated to get one-so they bitched, and more were built. I can't remember the exact number-but of the 50,000 or so 'Vettes sold in 1978 nearly 10,000 were "Pace Cars" and nearly 10,000 more had the two-tone Silver Anniversary paint. So their not that rare. Especially L48 / TH350 models. An L82 / 4-speed in good condition is worth some bucks, but not 427 Stingray or Split-window coupe money like the assholes selling them would lead you to believe. # 3. 1977 "Smokey and the Bandit" Trans-Am. Of the 68,000 Trans-Ams sold in 1977-over 15,000 were black and gold "SE" models. Their nice cars if you want a T/A-but their not worth 455HO or SD-455 money. In fact-I'd pay more for a documented DKM "Macho T/A" only about 300 a year were built from '77-79, or a '79 10th Anniversary model-only 7,500 of those were built and only 1,817 with the 400 / 4-speed combo. # 4. 1974-76 "Starsky&Hutch" Gran Torino. Because of that show's immense popularity Ford decided to capitalize. But the cars are garden variety 2 dr Torinos. Most have a 351M with a two-barrel carb, bench seats, and a column-shifted automatic!!. The only thing unique is the red-and-white paint job and slotted mag wheels. Serramonte Ford where my dad and I worked in the late'70's and early '80's sold tons of them. They'd take every 2 dr Torino they could get or dealer trade for-paint them red and white, and put the slot mags on them and sell them for top dollar. They even sold one that was originally Green!! I mean who buys a Red car with a Green interior??!! Someone did. # 5. 1979 Hurst / Olds. This is the only H / O that wasn't built by Hurst Performance. They were built entirely in Lansing where every other Cutlass was built. They have a garden-variety 350 that wheezes out 160 hp backed by a TH350. They have gold rally wheels and a white and gold paint job, and Olds shamelessly put "W30" emblems on it, but their really a generic '79 Cutlass coupe with a trick paint job. Even Olds fanatics snub these cars for the smog-dog fakes that they are. Now if Olds had put the 403 in the downsized "G" body-they might have had something-but they didn't. I'm sure there's others I missed-but you get the drift. Don't pay top dollar for some "Rare" bird on the SELLER's word. Mastermind        

Your not "Ruining" a car by upgrading it.....

Had some more people talking about "Factory Freaks" and asking if you'd hurt their value by upgrading some options. Like I said-their not rare or collectible-their just weird. For example-although you could get a TH400 in "Big" cars from 1965 on, If you had an automatic in a 1964-66 GTOs,Chevelles, Cutlass / 442s, and Buick Skylarks all had ST300s. ( A BOP bolt-pattern two-speed Powerglide ). The TH400 wasn't offered in a GTO, 442, SS396, or GS400 until 1967. However, the upside is a TH350 is the exact same size as a Powerglide / ST300 and even uses the same U-Joint and rear trans mount. So you could literally bolt in a TH350 and drastically improve your car's performance. You can even use the stock shift linkage, but you won't be able to manually engage low gear. However with a good B&M or TransGo shift kit that won't be a problem either. And don't worry-TH350s are incredibly tough-they can handle up to 450 hp easily, which is the high end of what a 389 Pontiac, 400 Olds or Buick or 396 Chevy can make anyway. My brother has a TH350 in his '69 GTO behind his 400 that has the Edelbrock Torker II package on it. Edelbrock claims 402 hp and 430 lbs of torque with this package. He's drag-raced it incessantly for five years and never had a problem. So unless you've got a mega-hp engine in your GM car-you don't really "need" a TH400. The same goes for three-speed sticks. GM, Ford or Mopar-your actually increasing the value and performance of the car by swapping in a 4-speed. If you put a Tri-power setup on your '66 GTO or a "Six-Pack" setup on your '69 Road Runner you've greatly increased it's "Curb Appeal" as well as performance even though it's not "Original". If you put junkyard or aftermarket front disc brakes on your '68 Chevelle-you've increased it's value, not decreased it. If you put a 4bbl carb and intake on your 2V 351C Mustang or Cougar it's not worth any less. Who really cares if you put "Snowflake" wheels on your '77-79 T/A-even if it had Rally II's stock?  Even changing engines-no one cares if you buy a 350 Firebird and swap in a 400 or 455, or if you take a 318 Challenger and swap in a 340 or a 440. It always amazes me-people are so worried about what the car will be worth if or when they sell it, that they can't enjoy it. I mean, did you marry your wife because you thought she'd give you an easier divorce than other women you dated?  Really?  Mastermind