Beware of what you want....Because you might get it....

The old proverb in the title really applies to buying and owning a classic musclecar. I talk to so many people who spend major bucks on a classic car and then are disappointed in it's performance and drivability. There are several causes of this, and most can avoided with some forethought. # 1. Realize that anything built before 1960 is going to be primitive and bare bones, and seem slugginsh compared to later cars. For example- you may think a '57 T-Bird is a cool ride,-hey Dan Tanna drove one in "Vegas" and they've been featured in countless other movies and T.V. shows. A '62 T-Bird is light years ahead in performance, comfort and handling. The '62 model will have the torquey 390 V8 that was used in millions of cars and trucks through 1976, which has way more power, and gets better gas mileage than the boat anchor 292 / 312 inch Y-Blocks. They will have power steering and brakes, and better handling and riding suspension and factory A/ C and power windows, etc. In just 5 years of development. This is not an isolated example. I had a friend who bought a '55 Pontiac and hated it. It had no power steering, no power brakes, the 287 inch V8 was underpowered in the heavy car and he said driving it was like driving a big dump truck. He sold it and on my recommendation bought a '63 Gran Prix. He loved it. The interior was luxurious, it handled like a dream, especially on the highway and the 389 V8 would literally spin it's tires as long as he wanted to stay on the throttle. Things improved exponentially through the later '60's. Chrysler found a huge increase in performance and drivability not in the engine but with the transmission when they introduced the Torqueflite automatic in 1962. GM replaced the horrible old "Slim Jim" hydromatics with the excellent TH400 in 1965. By 1965 front disc brakes were optional on some cars, ( Corvettes had 4-wheel discs ) and by 1967 were standard, or at least optional on almost everything. I'm not saying don't buy a '55 Buick Roadmaster or a '57 Chevy or a '50 Merc coupe or whatever your dream car is-I'm just saying-realize that the 60+ year old technology is not going to be up to things just a few years later. The aforementioned '55 Buick doesn't even have a modern, open driveline-it has the old "Torque Tube" and a huge pumpkin at the rear., The Kingpin front suspension rides and handles like an old dump truck-like the old Pontiac owner said.  My buddy's '63 Riviera is an awesome car to this day. Besides the cool, hidden headlight styling, the 401 V8 has way more power than the old 322, the ball-joint / control arm suspension is light-years ahead in ride and handling quality, the power steering and brakes feel like a modern car, and it has factory a/c, power windows, tilt wheel, etc. My buddy says-he likes it because it has Cadillac like luxury and GTO like performance. In just 8 years. If it's a show car- that's only going to be driven on and off the trailer, then do whatever you want. But if you plan to drive the car at all-you may be much happier in a '65 Impala than you will be in a '58!!  # 2. The "Biggest and Baddest" isn't for everyone. I mentioned an older gentleman who had bought a 435 hp, 11:1 compression, solid-lifter, 4-speed, 4.11:1 geared 1969 427 Stingray. And hated it. It pinged even on premium gas,got 5-8 mpg, the clutch was stiff, his wife burned her legs on the sidepipes everytime she got in or out of it, and the motor buzzing at 3,500 rpm on the freeway was annoying. Since it was a premium model he was able to recoup his investment when he sold it, and is much happier in the low-compression, L82 350 / TH350 Silver Anniversary 1978 model that he bought. He and his wife love taking it on weekend trips to Lake Tahoe or the wine country with the t-tops out, or if it's too hot, with the t-tops in and the A/C blasting. The seats are comfortable, the engine idles smoothly on 87 octane pump gas, and the suspension doesn't rattle your fillings loose. It looks cool, and it's fast enough to back up the image-he doesn't have to take crap from little boys in Honda Civics or soccer moms in Hemi Cherokees. He's much happier now. Again-this is not an isolated example. If your a Mopar guy-you may be much happier in a 3.23:1 geared, 440 / Torqueflite GTX with power steering, front disc brakes, bucket seats, and factory A/C than you would be in a stripped-down, manual steering, drum braked, 4-speed Hemi Road Runner with 4.30:1 gears!!  Everyone loves a Boss 302. They are undenaibly badass. But they have very little torque below 3,000 rpm and there's a reason they were only available with a 4-speed and 3.90:1 or 4.30:1 gears!! If your going to drive the car at all-you might be better off with one of the 70,000 other '69 Mach 1s that are 351W powered. It's a much better street engine, with gobs of low-end torque, and will be much more pleasant in city traffic than the 11;1, solid-lifter, fire-breathing "Boss". I mentioned this in another earlier post. Edelbrocks "Performer" Package for Pontiacs made 387 hp and 439 lbs of torque on a 400, and had 15 inches of vacuum at idle. The "Performer RPM" package-( which has a cam that's an exact replica of the factory RAIV ) makes 422 hp and 441 lbs of torque and only has 10 inches of vacuum at idle. That's a gain of 35 hp and only 2 lbs of torque. Your giving up a lot of idle quality and low-end and mid-range torque for top-end rush. There's a reason RAIV's were only available with 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears! On street tires, in the real world, all other things being equal-is a car with 422 hp going to be noticably faster than one with 387 hp? Probably not. Like I said, your giving up a lot of good drivability for a little top-end gain. If all your doing is drag-racing it, then 2 or 3 tenths in the 1/4 mile might be worth the compromise to you. But again-if your going to drive the car at all-the one with slightly less power and a much smoother idle and broader torque curve will work better 99% of the time!  If you just "Gotta Have" a Hemi ' Cuda, or an LS6 Chevelle, an L88 'Vette, or a Boss 429, or 427 Fairlane or an RAIV Judge, etc-and can afford it, more power to you. But for 95% of the rest of us-you may be happier with  less than the biggest and baddest model.  Which brings up # 3. Be honest about what you really want. I've said it before, but it's worth re-iterating here. If you live where it gets very hot in the summer-it might behoove you to get a car with factory A / C. If you live in a big city like San Francisco or Los Angeles with a lot of stop-n-go traffic, an automatic transmission might be a better choice than a 4-speed. If you live in the country 30 miles from the nearest town-a car with 3.23:1 gears is going to be a lot more pleasant on the highway than one with 4.10:1s!!  If you follow these simple guidelines, you'll be a lot happier with your investment in the long run. Mastermind           

A VIN tag doesn't make a car....

Read a disturbing article in Musclecar Review the other day. Don't get me wrong, I love the magazine, and I correspond with the editor all the time, and he publishes my stuff occasionally. I guess I should have said the subject matter of the article was disturbing. Someone had found the remains of a "Bullitt" Mustang in a junkyard in Mexico. To call this rusting, engineless,transmissionless, inteirorless, hulk a "basket case" would have been an understatement. However, the cowl and the VIN tag were intact, and upon running a Marti report and checking with Ford historical services, it was verified as one of the cars used in the movie. The new owner excitedly said he was going to restore it to it's former glory. How? I mean all that's left of the original car is the VIN tag and part of the rusting body shell!!  I know Dynacorn and other companies sell complete Mustang bodies ( they also sell Camaros, '55-57 Chevys, and other stuff. ). I know you can buy replacement front and rear subframes, and all the interior trim. It probably wouldn't be too hard to find a 390 V8 and a Top-Loader 4-speed with 1967 or 68 date codes. But in reality-if he follows through on the project he's going to have a completely new car built around an old VIN tag. Does that make it "original?" No, because virtually nothing on the car is original!!  Does that make it restored?  I don't think so-because again-how much of the original vehicle was "restored?" The dash pad, the firewall and the left front fender?  The editor asked it another way-which I think is relevant. The Smithsonian supposedley has George Washington's ax-the one he chopped down the Cherry Tree with. It looks pretty damn good for being 200+ years old. That's because it's been "restored" several times since 1757 or whenever young George's father confronted him about the tree. If the handle's been refinished or replaced several times and the head has been re-sharpened or replaced several times, how much of the original ax exists? If you bought Jimi Hendrix's guitar and the neck had been replaced and the strings had been replaced, and the electronic pickups had been replaced-how much of the original Fender Stratocaster is left?  Doubtless, since you can prove Hendrix's ownership that makes it a valuable piece of rock-n-roll history; but it still doesn't make it original. I think this opens a "Pandora's Box" that's going to cause a lot of lawsuits over high-end car sales. I've talked many times about the Judge I had in high school. Think about this scenario. What if, Instead of my parents forcing me to sell it after losing my drvier's liscence, I kept it several more years and then totalled it in the early 80's. I buy the wreck from the insurance company. I put the RAIII engine and 4-speed in plastic bags in my garage. The crumpled body sits in my backyard for years. I just can't bring myself to haul it to the crusher. Then the '90's happen and musclecar values go into the stratosphere. I go buy a '69 LeMans that's in pretty good shape. I put my VIN tag on it, install the RAIII and the Muncie tranny and get the stripes and spoilers and maybe a new Endura front bumper from Year One or the Goat Farm. I have all my original paperwork, and the numbers on the engine and tranny match. If the prospective buyer contacts Pontiac Historical Services with the VIN and the casting numbers on the block, heads and tranny-it's going to come back as a for-real GTO Judge. I sell it for megabucks. Has the buyer got an original numbers matching RAIII / 4-speed Judge?  Certianly with the RAIII heart there's some Judge DNA in there, but it's not the same car that rolled off the assembly line in 1969 and that I bought in 1978!!  How would the buyer prove this? And if he could-let's say for arguments sake-my neighbors told him what I did and he decides to sue me for fraud and get his money back. If I had been smart enough to keep the salvage title of my car and re-register the cobbled up one as "rebuilt" with that title and the original VIN tag-the guy wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court. The Judge- ( Pun Intended ) would rule that he knowingly and willingly bought a "rebuilt" car and that since it did have the proper VIN and corresponding powertrain numbers, and especially since Pontiac Historical services verified the VIN, no crime was committed. The guy would be out whatever dollar amount I fleeced him for and I laugh all the way to the bank. Could the guy sell the car to someone else and recoup his investment? Probably, but the point I'm making is the car still isn't original, and the guy did kinda get screwed, regardless of the court's ruling!!  You can see how this kind of stuff would really complicate things for collectors. A buddy of mine had a 440 / Six-Pack Super Bee in high school. One night he missed a shift and grenaded the engine. I mean, rods out the side of the block, grenaded. We went to a junkyard and got a low-mileage 440 out of a wrecked '73 Chrysler Imperial for $250 and put that in the car. The only reason he did that instead of taking a FREE 383 from another buddy was the intake manifolds on "B" and "RB" engines don't interchange and he wanted to keep the Tri-Power on it. He drove it several more years and then sold it. Wherever that car is now-if it hasn't been wrecked or extensively modified-it's 99% original except for the engine!!  Back to the car in the article-I don't think a VIN tag makes a car, escpecially if everything on the car has been replaced. He can claim some link to the Movie, and has an interesting story to go with the car if or when he sells it, but Original?  No way.  That's where the old saying "Buyer Beware" really rings true. Mastermind               

It's okay to "Run What You Brung".....

Everyone is so enamored of the premium musclecars that we often forget that there's a lot of base models out there in good condition that would make great drivers or show cars or race cars if you wanted. For example of the 400,000 Chevelles produced in 1968 alone-only 58,000 were SS396 models. What that means is you can buy a 2 dr small-block Malibu a lot easier and cheaper than you can an SS396! And since it's not a numbers-matching premium piece of history-no one cares if you modify it. Swap in a 383 stroker, or a supercharged LS motor. There's tons of suspension upgrades out there for '64-77 GM "A" bodies-so you can build a corner-carving "G" machine, or a drag racer that will pull the front tires on launch. Of the 243,000 Camaros sold in 1969, only 19,000 were Z/28 models. Of the 299,000 Mustangs Ford sold in 1969, only 1,603 were Boss 302's, and only 13,000 were 428 CJ models. What I'm getting at here is there are a lot more base-models out there than there are "primo" models. So if you get a deal on a 318 Challenger, or a 350 Camaro, Chevelle, Firebird or LeMans, or a 302 or 351 Mustang or whatever-don't despair that it's not a big-block, and immediately start plotting how to clone the "big brothers". If that's what you want, fine. But not everyone needs or even wants a 500 hp fire-breathing monster. Like I said-if you have a 318 / Torqueflite Challenger and you'd like a just a little more zip-an Edelbrock Performer intake and a 4bbl carb, some dual exhausts and a shift kit in the trans will "wake up" the car's performance like you wouldn't believe. And that may be all you want. Drive it that way the next 20 years. Ditto for all the other makes. 302 and 351W / C Fords, 350 Pontiacs and Olds engines, 304 and 360 AMC's, 327 and 350 Chevys, all respond well to basic hot-rod tricks-a 4bbl carb and intake, headers and / or dual exhausts, a mild cam upgrade, etc. I've mentioned it before, but I know a guy who was looking for a '64-66 GTO, that bought a '64 442 that had a later-model 350 in it. He was torn between hunting down a 330 to make it Concours Original or swapping in a 455 to make it really badass. Five years and one paint job later, he's still driving it on sunny days and during Hot August Nights with the "unoriginal" 350 because-in his own words-"It runs so good and it's so damn much fun to drive that I can't bring myself to tear it apart."  And there's nothing wrong with that. Mastermind

Some full-size cars that can be great sleepers.....

Since everyone is chasing Camaros, Chevelles, GTOs, Firebirds,Chargers, Road Runners, Challengers, 442s,Mustangs, Cougars, etc-people often forget that there are a lot of full-size cars out there that are great performers, and because they were usually the top of the line-have cool options like factory A/C, power windows and seats, upgraded interiors, and bigger engines. Here's some alternative bodystyles that offer tremendous bang for the buck. # 1. 1969-76 Pontiac Gran Prix. These cars are dynamite. 400 cubes standard all years, and a fair number of '70-76 "SJ" models have 455s. Any suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Chevelle will fit these cars so the potential is huge. My sister had a '72 GP in high school. It had power everything, and it felt like a GTO. She showed her taillights to many shocked Camaro, Chevelle and Mustang drivers.  # 2. 1960-68 Pontiacs. While 99% of Impalas and Caprices built in this period have 283 or 327 small-block motivation, every single Pontiac Catalina, Bonneville, or Gran Prix had at least 389 cubes under the hood, and some had 400, 421 or 428!  Any suspension or brake upgrades that fit an Impala will fit these as well. # 3. 1966-69 Buick Riviera. I personally think the '66-67 Riviera is one of the best looking cars GM ever produced. They have the swoopy, fastback, hidden headlight styling of the Olds Toronado, but with less chrome and doo-dads, and are still rear-wheel drive. And with 430 cubes under that long hood, they move pretty good too. The '68-69 models are gorgeous too, but they changed the front bumper, and I don't like it as well as the cleaner '66-67 models. You can't go wrong either way. Buick guys will gripe, but I envision one jet-black with 17" Torq-Thrust mags and fat tires, and a snarling 572 inch Chevy Rat Motor under the hood. All you'd need are some Chevy motor mounts and a Chevy bolt-pattern TH400....# 4. 1967-69 Oldsmobile 88 / 98. When I was a kid, my mom had a gorgeous '67 88 Convertible. It was blue with white interior and had Torq-Thrust mags on it, and with 425 cubes under the hood, could lay rubber all the way across an intersection. The coupes have fastback styling, and either 425 or 455 cubes under the bonnet. Again-one of the things great about GM stuff-interchangeability-any suspension or brake upgrades that fit an Impala will fit these. # 5. 1969-78 Plymouth Sport Fury. In the immortal words of Dan Ackroyd / Elwood Blues-"It's got cop tires, cop shocks, a cop motor..." Most have 383, 400 or 440 cubes under the hood, and the 2 door models are pretty good-looking. Peter Graves drove one on "Mission Impossible". Fred Dryer wrecked a bunch on "Hunter". # 6. 1965-72 Ford Galaxie / LTD. The '65-67 Galaxie is one of the best-looking cars Ford ever produced. They closely resemble a '65 Pontiac in profile, which are also near and dear to my heart. Their interiors are awesome with bucket seats, consoles, lots of chrome. And with 390 cubes under the hood, they move. Later models may have 428s or 429s, which is, if anything, a bonus. Some '71-72 models may have 400C's, but they have great potential.  # 7. 1967-71 Ford Thunderbird. I like the '67-69 models best with their hidden headlights and clean styling, but their all beautiful. '67-69 models will have 390 or 428 or 429 cubes under the hood. 1970-71 models have 429s exclusively, but with 375 hp who's complaining?  By '72, the party was over. Compression ratios were lowered and the name was transferred to the much heavier, and uglier Lincoln MK IV platform. There wouldn't be another high-performance T-Bird until the Supercharged 1989 model.  Chevy guys are going to ask-where's the Impala?  The reason it was left off was explained when I talked about '60's Pontiacs. 99% of '60's and early '70's Impalas have small-blocks 350 cubes or less for power, and 396, 427 and 454 versions are priced in the stratosphere. All the other cars listed here have big-blocks as standard equipment.  Mastermind

Other overlooked big-blocks that can really rock.....

In the race for "Gotta have the biggest and baddest" sometimes people overlook diamonds in the rough. I talked in the last post about some great engines that make great power but are often overlooked because the buff magazines are always featuring these 500+ inch, 600+ hp monsters. Those are definitely cool if you can afford one, but a lot of us can't write a check for 15 grand for an engine!  Besides the usual supects-454 Chevy, 455 BOP's, 440 Mopars,460 Fords, and the 400 ( give or take a bit; 383,389,390, and 396 are close enough to 400 ) inchers I mentioned in the last post, there's a few more that enterprsing hot rodders overlook in their quest for power. # 1. 421 / 428 Pontiac. I love 421s and 428s. They have the best of both worlds-they rev up like a 389 / 400 and have the massive torque of a 455. The downside is the 421 was only produced from 1962-66, and the 428 from '67-69. If you have one already in the car or can buy one for a reasonable price their the only way to fly. I like them better than 455s, for the reasons I just cited. And you can always put a custom 428 crank into a 400 block and ( with a .030 overbore ) have 433 inches of stompin' Poncho power.  # 2. 413 / 426 Chrysler. A lot of people don't know it, but Chrysler made a 426 inch V8 that WASN'T a Hemi in the early '60s. And until the 440 was introduced in 1967 a lot of the "Big" cars-i.e.-Dodge Polaras and Monacos, Chrysler Imperials, Plymouth Furys, big station wagons, etc-had 413s under the hood. They are an "RB" engine-so anything that fits a 440-heads, intakes, cams etc will fit these. The downside is they've been out of production since 1966 so their kinda rare, but dynamite if you can find one.  # 3. 425 Oldsmobile. Anything that fits a 400 or 455 will fit these, so they can really rock with the right parts. The only downside is they were only produced from 1965-67. ( The 455 debuted in '68 ). However-they were used in all the "big" cars-88s,98s, wagons, and Toronados so theres more out there than you might think. # 4. 430 Buick. Same deal here-they were only used from 1966-69, but they were used in almost every model. Stock or modified, anything 430 cubes is going to have some serious torque. All the go-fast goodies-heads, intakes etc that fit a 400 / 455 fit these, so you can build a beast if you want to.  #5 400C / M Ford. These were used in various Ford cars and trucks from 1971-82 so there's a lot of them out there. They had a reputation as "dogs" because they were saddled with 8:1 compression, a lazy cam, single exhaust, 2bbl carburation, and were put in big, heavy cars and trucks with salt-flats gearing like 2.80:1. However-their "Cleveland" style heads have ports and valves the size of a 427 Chevy; give him some reasonable compression, a good cam, some headers and a 4bbl carb and intake and you'll have a beast. Every year in the "Engine Masters Challenge" theirs someone with a 400 Ford that's pumping out 550+ hp on 91 octane pump gas. Set up right, one of these "Rodney Dangerfields " can make as much power as a 429 or 460 with a lot less expense.  I'm sure some people are going to howl that I didn't mention the 427 Chevy. I didn't for three reasons. One-"Original" 427s were only produced from '66-69 and 'Vette restorers hog them and will pay blood and a first-born child for one. The chance of you finding one at a reasonable price is almost nil. You'd have a better chance of getting struck by lightning on the golf course. If you "Gotta Have" a 427 Chevy-GMPP sells them as crate engines to this day-with 480 hp and 500+ lbs of torque. Or you could find a 454 block and put a 427 crank in it. So the mighty 427 isn't really overlooked, it's basically alive and well. That's why it wasn't on the list. Hope this helps people out.  Mastermind  

Some "Small" big-blocks that are still viable but overlooked....

The current trend in the buff magazines seems to be "Bigger is Better" as they feature 500+ inch stroker engines incessantly. A 454 Chevy or 455 Pontiac or Olds or 440 Mopar or 460 Ford seems to be "entry level" according to these writers. The reality is-you can have a very strong performer with-here's an oxymoron-a medium sized big-block. Here's some that are overlooked but can still give you major horsepower and torque.  # 1. 396 / 402 Chevy. With GMPP selling 572 inch  Rat motors with 720 hp, and people fighting with machetes for 427s and 454s to build, it's easy to see how these "little brothers" get overlooked. The reality is because they can use the same heads, cam etc-a 396 / 402 can make just as much power as a 427 or 454, just at a higher rpm. The original L78 396 was rated at 425 hp in the 1965 Corvette-the same as the legendary L72 427 and only 25 hp down from the legendary 450 hp LS6 454. You can make 350 hp with 8:1 compression on junk gas and using factory iron intake and exhaust manifolds. You can make 450-500 hp so easy it's almost criminal. Edelbrock claims 540 hp and 530 lbs of torque from their "Performer RPM" package on a 454. Most big-block Chevy builders go by the rule of thumb that all other things being equal, a 454 will make 20 hp more than a 427, and a 427 will make 20 hp more than a 396. Using that formula you'd still have 500 hp and 500 lbs of torque, which would make any street car a major rocket.  # 2. 383 / 400 Chrysler. Everyone talks about Hemis and 440s, but just like the Chevys-you can make just as much power as a 440 just at higher rpm. Chrysler engineers took the heads, cam and intake from the 440 Magnum to power the 383 Road Runner. The 383 was rated at 335 hp and the 440 was rated at 375. Edelbrock claims 417 hp from their "Performer RPM" package on a 383 and 469 hp on a 440.  Not a ton of difference.  A great testimonial to the might of 383's came from Carey Loftin-who was stunt coordinator on both "Bullitt" and "Vanishing Point"-THE two car-chase classics in most people's book-spoke about the iconic Challenger piloted by Barry Newman in the film. "We had 5 cars." "Four were 440 / 4-speeds, and the camera car was a 383 / Automatic." "I used the camera car to tow the camaro we blew up toward the bulldozers at 80 mph because the automatic drivetrain wouldn't jerk when shifting like the sticks and slacken the tow cable."  "I honestly think the 383 would run just as fast as the 440." "That 383 was a great running car."  The 400 used from '72-78 is just a bored out 383. Either one would power your Mopar project just fine, so don't sell your soul for a 440.  # 3. 389 / 400 Pontiac. Cutting down a 455 crank and putting it in a 400 block to get 461cubes ( with a .030 overbore ) is all the rage now, although Smokey Yunick was doing it in the early '60's for Fireball Roberts when his Pontiacs were the scourge of NASCAR. A 389 / 400 has 3 inch main bearings, while a 421 / 428 / 455 had 3.25 inch mains. Smokey figured out that the smaller main bearings would hold up better at high rpm and break less when running 500 miles at Daytona. To win the race, you've got to finish the race, right?  So Smokey was cutting down 421 cranks and putting them in 389 blocks to build his 421 race engines. 50 years later-guys are doing the same thing. You can buy stroker Pontiac crank, rod and piston kits from several sources. However-if you have one already in the car or can buy one cheap, a 389 / 400 can make just as much power as a 455, and probably stay together longer. 389s were in every Pontiac built from 1959-66, and 400s were in everything from '67-78.  Edelbrock claims 422 hp and 441`lbs of torque from their Performer RPM package on a 400. The "regular" Perfromer Package makes 387 hp and 439 lbs of torque on a 400, and has a much smoother-idling cam that makes 15 inches of vacuum at idle instead of 10. With the RPM cam-( which is basically a replica of the factory RAIV cam ) your giving up quite a bit of low-end and mid-range torque for top-end rush. In a same-weight car, with similar gearing, on street tires-is a car with 422 hp really going to be any quicker than one with 387 hp? I doubt it.  # 4. 390 Ford. Everyone wants 427s, 428s, 429s and 460s. The problem is  ( except for 460's which were used in trucks until 1997 and are still being sold as SVT crate engines to this day ) those big-inch engines are rare, and thus expensive, if you can find one for sale at ANY price. When's the last time you saw a for-real 427 or 428 or 429CJ engine for sale in a want ad?  By contrast 390s were used in virtually every Ford model from 1961-76 and are plentiful. And they are externally identical to the other "FE" engines so if your building a Thunderbolt or Cobra or Fairlane clone or CJ Mustang clone no one will know it's not a 427 or 428 unless you tell them!  Edelbrock claims 452 hp and 428 lbs of torque from their dual-quad Performer RPM package which would certainly give you the look and the oomph to back it up.  # 5. 400 Oldsmobile. These were only used from 1965-69. Everyone chases the 455s used from 1968-76. If you have a 400 already in the car, or can buy one cheap, by all means use it. Don't empty your bank account and search the galaxy for a 455. Everything that fits a 455-Edelbrock aluminum heads and intakes, aftermarket cams, headers etc will work on a 400. And like their Pontiac cousins-400 inch Olds motors make massive low-end and mid-range torque. When you've got 400+ lbs of torque from idle on up you don't need to rev to 6 or 7 grand!  # 5. 400 Buick. These also were only used from 1965-69, and like the Olds fans, Buick guys sell their souls for the 1970-76 455s. If you have a 400 in the car or can buy one at a reasonable price I would definitely use it rather than chase a running or rebuildable 455. Even bone-stock, anything 400 cubes is going to run pretty damn good. And there are hot rod parts available for these engines-Edelbrock sells heads and intakes for them, Crane and Lunati make cams, etc. So if your building a Skylark or Century or Regal project, or want a more modern power plant in a 50's convertible or early Riviera, ( but want to keep it all Buick, you don't want a big-block Chevy or an LS motor ) a 400 may be just the ticket. If you can afford a 572 Chevy or a 514 Ford or a 505 Mopar, etc-more power to you-pun intended-but if your on a budget-these 400 inchers offer a LOT of "bang" for the buck.  Mastermind            

The "Other" 350s can be fun too....

Everyone wants the big-block musclecars, but they can be pricey. The fact is if your looking for a GM musclecar that isn't a Chevy-there are a lot of LeMans, Firebird,Ventura, Cutlass, Omega, and Century and Regals out there with 350 cubes under the hood. If you have or can buy one cheap, you don't have to immediately start looking for a 400-425-428-430-455 BOP big block. The 350s can be made to run pretty damn good.  #1. The best of the "other" ( non-Chevrolet ) 350s is the Olds version, for three reasons: they are an oversquare-large bore / small stroke design, the bottom-ends are bulletproof-they converted some to diesel in the late 70's-if they can hold together with 22.5:1 compression required to fire diesel fuel-they can take anything you can throw at it. And third-there was a factory high-performance version-the famous "W31".  Edelbrock claims 397 hp and 400 lbs ft of torque from their "Performer RPM" package. Magazine writers spout numbers flippantly-but 400 honest hp will make any street car a rocket. And-anything that fits a 350 will fit a 403-if your car has a tired 330 or 350 that needs to be pulled and rebuilt anyway-53-73 extra cubes will definitely give you a nice power and torque boost.  # 2. 350 Pontiac. The design that gives them such massive low-end torque is also why they can't make really big power. They are a small-bore / long stroke design. A 400 uses the same stroke. The small bore limits them because the big-port,big-valve heads used on the 400-421-428-455 engines that you need for really big power can't be used-the valves will hit the block. People talk about clearancing the block to use the big heads, but why? Pontiacs are externally identical from a 326-455-so if you have that much money and need that much power-just swap in a 400 or 455. That aside-they do respond well to basic hot rod tricks-headers and dual-exhausts, 4bbl carb and intake, mild cam upgrades. Your just accentuating what Pontiac did stock-make big torque at low rpm. I wouldn't rev one over 5,500. You can make 325-350 hp and 400 lbs of torque pretty easy and still have a good idle and street manners, and people will THINK you swapped in a big block. If you need more power than that, you'll need a 400 or 455.  # 3. 350 Buick. These were used in a lot of cars from 1968-77. The upside is they make a lot more power and torque than the obsolete 300-327-340 engines they replaced. The downside is unlike their Chevy, Olds, and Pontiac cousins-there was never a factory high-performance version, and there isn't much aftermarket support. Edelbrock doesn't even make a manifold for them-and Edelbrock makes manifolds for just about everything from flathead Fords, to AMC's, Cadillacs, even Hondas and Toyotas. There is a company called T/A perfromance that sells intakes, cams, headers etc for 350 Buicks so that's one way to go. If you need really big power-then I'd suggest swapping in a 400-430-455. Edelbrock does make heads and intakes for these, and Crane and Comp Cams and others make cams and valvetrain components for them. Anyhow-you be surprised how well these non-Chcvy small-blocks can run with a little tweaking, and very little dollar investment.  Mastermind      

Special Editions that aren't really special...

Every person who's selling an old car wants the buyer to think it's rare or special, obviously to drive the price up. However there's a lot of cars, some that the manufacturers even called "Special Editions" that are nothing, well-special, and don't warrant spending more money over a base-model. Here's some to look out for that would be cool drivers, but don't spend big money to buy, in no particular order. # 1. 1971-74 Dodge Charger SE. The "SE" package was purely cosmetic. In '71-72 it included hidden headlights, a vinyl top, upgraded upholstery and some chrome here and there. '73-74 models had exposed headlamps,upgraded upholstery, and ( in my opinion ) an ugly little "Opera" window that screwed up the Charger's classic roofline and a vinyl top. Power choices range from a 318 to a 440. If you can buy one cheap their alright, but there's nothing rare or special about them. # 2. 1973-75 Chevelle Laguna S3. These had body-colored endura front bumpers, swivel bucket seats, two-tone paint jobs and Rally wheels. Other than that their a garden-variety Malibu. Most have 350 power. Expect to pay substantially more for 454 models-but thats par for the course for any Chevelle or Monte Carlo-the Rat versions cost more. # 3. 1974-76 "Starsky&Hutch" Ford Gran Torino. Due to the popularity of the hit buddy-cop TV show, Ford dealers everywhere capitalized by selling droves of Torinos with the red and white paint job and aluminum slot mags. If they couldn't order them from Ford fast enough, they dressed them up in their own shops. Serramonte Ford-where I worked sold a few with GREEN interiors, because they repainted a white or green car with the red and white. Who buys a red car with green interior?  Several people did!  However-their a garden-variety Gran Torino. A lot of them had bench seats, and 2bbl 351M motivation. Not exactly a rocket. Expect to pay more for 460 models, but other than that, hey-its a '74-76 Torino-who cares?  # 4. 1977-79 Special Edition Trans-Am. "Smokey and The Bandit" sold a ton of these. Of the 68,000 T/A's sold in 1977 alone, over 15,000 were black and gold "SE's". Of the 93,000 sold in '78 and the 117,000 sold in '79-many thousands more are out there. In '78 and '79 they also had a Gold "SE" model. Except for the color scheme and the gold dash panel, their a garden-variety T/A. Power is either a 400 Pontiac or a 403 Olds V8. Their fine if you want a Disco-era T/A, but I wouldn't spend extra cash-like you would for a documented DKM "Macho T/A"-or a documented Herb Adams "Fire-Am".  # 5. 1978 "Silver Anniversary / Indy 500 Pace Car Corvette.  All of the 50,000 plus '78 Corvettes had "Silver Anniversary" badging. Over 10,000 had the two-tone Silver / Charcoal grey paint and silver leather interior. As for the Indy Pace Cars-GM said they to make at least one for every dealer. Since Chevrolet had over 7,700 dealers at that time-nearly 8,000 were built, although not every dealer got one. Other than the Pace Car black and silver paint job and graphics-their nothing special. Obviously L82 / 4-speed models will bring more than L48 / TH350 versions-but that's true of all disco-era 'Vettes. # 6. 1979 Hurst / Olds. These weren't even built by Hurst, they were done entirely at the Lansing factory. Their a garden-variety "G" body Cutlass with a Dual-Gate shifter and a white and gold or black and gold paint job and gold aluminum wheels. The "W30" ( Olds shamelessly desecrated the legendary moniker ) V8 is a 350 Olds that wheezed out 160 hp. 2,400 were built. Other than the trim-your better off just buying any old '78-79 Cutlass-if you want a '78-79 Cutlass!!  I don't.  Anyhow-don't get suckered by someone selling one of these "Special" cars. Their not special. Mastermind      

More one or two year wonders that might be cool...

A friend reminded me of some other overlooked one or two year wonders that I didn't include in the previous post.  Here they are, in no particular order. # 1. 1967-68 "California Special" Mustang. These coupes had Shelby-style side scoops and taillights, special striping and rally wheels. Most were 289 powered, but a few had 390s. Their a little cooler than a base-model Mustang, but I wouldn't pay Shelby money for one-other than the taillights and scoops their really nothing special, but they are unique.  # 2. 1968-70 "W31" Cutlass / F85. These "Insurance Beaters" ( Insurance companies were jacking up the rates on musclecars; especially anything with an engine 400 cubes or more ) were a base-model Cutlass-contrary to popular belief-they are NOT a 442 in any way, shape or form. They have a 350 V8 with special heads, a hot 308 degree cam, an aluminum high-rise intake, special exhaust manifolds, and was so radical that it was only available with a 4-speed and 3.90:1 or 4.33:1 gears! They were grossly under-rated at 325 hp. ( The standard "station wagon" 350 had 310 hp; all that trick stuff was only worth 15 hp? Please.)  The "Catch 22" is-Olds collectors covet them so badly, that they usually bring the same amount of money as a 400 or 455 powered 442. Dynamite if you can find one at a reasonable price.  # 3. 1971-72 Dodge Demon. After the phenomenal sales success of the 1970 340 Plymouth Duster-the Dodge boys decided they wanted a piece of the action. The Demon was basically a Duster with a Dart grille, a scooped hood, a go-wing spoiler, and striping and a cool little grinning Devil holding a pitchfork emblems. And the high-winding 340 V8. Some Christian groups griped about the "Demon" name and the emblems, and Chrysler caved into the pressure and the name was changed to "Dart Sport" for 1973. Since Chrysler went bankrupt a few years later-where were all the "Christian" buyers they were supposedly catering to?  Anyhow-they are cooler than a 340 Duster if you can find one.  # 4. 1977 Pontiac Can-Am. Trying to capitalize on the Trans-Am's immense popularity, Pontiac came up with this performance package for the LeMans. Power was a 400 Pontiac V8 ( or a 403 Olds in California or High Altitude areas ) backed by a TH400 with a shift kit. Styling touches included a Trans-Am style "Shaker" hood scoop, a "Ducktail" rear spoiler, a Gran Prix dash panel, body-colored Rally II wheels, and "Judge" style striping. Since the GM "A" bodies-Chevelle, LeMans, Cutlass, Monte Carlo, Regal, etc were downsized, and for some odd reason re-named "G" bodies-for 1978-it only lasted one season. They have a ton of potential if you can find one. There are a million ways to build power into a Pontiac V8, and any suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Chevelle will fit these cars.  # 5. 1979 Chrysler 300. These were based on the Cordoba platform and included an E58 360 Police Interceptor V8, a Torqueflite and a 3.21:1 Sure-Grip rear end. Trim included special Rally Wheels, a special white paint job and a red leather interior. If a gussied-up Cordoba tickles your fancy-here's your ride. # 6. 1984-86 Ford Mustang SVO. These had a Turbocharged 4-cylinder engine with 175-205 hp depending on year, 16" aluminum wheels, 4-wheel disc brakes, and Recaro seats. Since the "5.0" V8 models were both faster and several thousand dollars cheaper the SVO's didn't sell well when they were new. If you can find one today they are a fun ride, and the Ford 4-banger has a bulletproof bottom-end if you want to turn up the boost.  # 7. 2003-2004 Mercury Marauder. These were supposed to be a tribute to the old full-size musclecars like the Pontiac 2+2, the Impala SS, and the original Mercury Marauder. Ford hoped they'd sell as well as the LT1 Impala SS did in the '90's.  They were based on the Crown Victoria platform and included the 302 hp 4.6 liter V8 out of the Mustang Cobra, a 4-speed automatic with a high-stall converter, 18" chrome wheels and fat tires, and a special interior with Auto Meter guages. Strangely-Ford never promoted the cars-I don't think I ever even saw a single road test in any of the buff magazines. Then they were shocked when they didn't sell!!  If you can find one-they are better performers than a "cop car" Crown Vic.  Mastermind        

Some "Rodney Dangerfield" One or Two Year wonders that might be cool....

Comedian Rodney Dangerfield always joked that he got "No Respect". There are a lot of muscle cars out there that for whatever reason only lasted one or two model years and are often overlooked, but can be great fun and a good bargain. Here's some of my favorites in no particular order. # 1. 1970-71 Pontiac Tempest T-37, 1972 LeMans GT. Often called "The Poor Man's GTO" the T-37 was a strippy Tempest that came standard with a 350 V8 and a 3-speed stick, but the 400 and 455 engines were optional, as was a 4-speed or a TH400. For some reason, the name was changed to "LeMans GT" in 1972, but the package was basically the same. These are a good way to get GTO performance at a lower price. # 2. 1971-72 "Heavy Chevy". These were a base-model Malibu with a domed "SS" style hood, a blacked out grille, 14" slotted Rally Wheels and decals that said "Heavy Chevy" on the fenders and rear deck. Most were 350 powered, but the 396 / 402 was available. Obviously-the Rat-Motored versions will be pricier, but their still cheaper than an "SS" model. And if you get a 350 version, besides a lower purchase price-there's more speed equipment for a small-block Chevy than anything else on the planet. 6,727 were built in '71 and another 3,000 or so in the strike-shortened year of '72.  # 3. 1973-75 Pontiac Grand Am. Based on the LeMans platform-these cars were touted to have the performance of a Trans-Am and the luxury of a Gran Prix. Unfortunately-luxury buyers bought GP's, and performance buyers bought T/A's. However-they were and are a great performance buy. 400 cubes standard all years with 455 optional. Wrist-thick front and rear sway bars and front disc brakes ( "Radial Tuned Suspension ") made them great handlers too. Dynamite if you can find one.  # 4. 1974 Pontiac GTO. Often called "The Best Nova Ever Built". For '74 Pontiac changed the GTO nameplate from the "A" body LeMans platform to the "X" body ( read Nova ) platform. The buff magazines howled to the high heavens and made fun of the car. However-they weighed about 600 lbs less than a Firebird and the 350 V8 moved them along pretty good, and they had cool syle points like a Trans-Am style "Shaker" hood scoop and a Hurst shifter with the 3 or 4-speed manuals and the TH350. A great thing-Pontiac engines are identical from a 326 to a 455-which means a 400 or 455 is a bolt-in swap, and any suspension or brake upgrades that fit a Camaro / Firebird will fit these cars. How badass would one of these 3,200 lb "X" bodies be with an aluminum-headed 468 inch engine, and Trans-Am sway bars and 4-wheel disc brakes be?  7.058 were built.  # 5. 1975 Plymouth Road Runner. For this one year only the Road Runner was based on the Sport Fury platform. You got Police Interceptor suspension, a 3.21:1 Sure-Grip rear end and the famous "Beep-Beep" horn. 318 versions are dogs, but the 360 and 400 models can really run with very little work. Over 6,000 were built, so their not a moon rock.  # 6. 1982 Mustang GT. These had a 302 V8 with a 2bbl carb and a 4-speed manual or a C4 automatic. Ford guys snub these like the plague in favor of the 4bbl / 5-speed stick / 4-speed auto '83-86 models or the Fuel-injected '87-93 models. So you can buy them cheap, and a 4bbl carb and intake is an easy upgrade to get a vast increase in performance. In fact-except for the Camaro / Firebird, there is probably more speed equipment for Fox-bodied Mustangs than anything else on the market, so hopping one up is both cheap and easy.  # 7. 1982 Corvette. These were the last of the C3 bodystyle that ran from 1968-82, and the first to have the "Cross-Fire" injected 350 and the 700R4 4-speed automatic. For some reason-'Vette collectors snub these cars in favor of the carburated '81 and earlier L48 and L82 models, or the '84 and later C4 models, which means you can buy them at a reasonable price. Their performance isn't bad-mid-15 second 1/4 mile times-and again there's a million ways to build power into a small-block Chevy. I have seen these on used-car lots as low as $3995.  "Corvette" and "Cheap" don't usually go in the same sentence, but if you want a bargain on a C3 'Vette, you'll be hard pressed to find a better deal than one of these. # 8. 1980 Z/28 Camaro. For this one year only you could get a 190 hp L48 350 V8 with a 4-speed stick that had a 3.44 1st gear and a 2.28 2nd and a 3.08:1 posi rear end. This gave much better off-the-line acceleration than the previous years 2.64 1st / 1.75 2nd and 3.73:1 rear cog, and had a higher top speed and better gas mileage on the freeway. The best of both worlds. Automatic versions got 3.42:1 rear ends, which kept performance near the level of the 4-speed models. They also had "Cowl Induction" hoods-a vacuum-operated flap that opened under full-throttle acceleration and sounded cool. Since Pontiac had dropped the 400 V8s-( The Turbo 301 T/A was a dog ) and you couldn't get an L82 'Vette with a 4-speed-this Camaro was the fastest american car that you could buy in 1980. For some insane reason-in 1981 you could only get a 4-speed with a 305 that wheezed out 145 hp. If you wanted a 350 you had to get a slushbox. Why-I don't know-'81 emission standards were not any different than 1980, and oddly enough-you could get the 350 / 4-speed combo in an '81 Z/28 in Canada! If history has taught us anything-it's that GM has never made rational decisions on marketing anything.  Mastermind    

More "A$%^oles of the Month"......

Hustler magazine used to have a column titled "Asshole of the Month" where they would make fun of people like the politician that railed against gay marriage and then got caught trying to pick up a guy in an airport bathroom, or the woman who founded M.A.D.D. ( Mothers Against Drunk Drivers ) who took a six-figure sales job with Seagram's, or the gun-control advocate who shot an intruder in his house with a unregistered handgun. These people richly deserve the derision they get. As do some of the people I get crap from, over stuff I posted 3 or 4 years ago!!  Anyhow-for the millionth time-I don't "hate" modern cars or their powertrains. Last year I tried to buy a Roush Mustang with a 674 hp, supercharged, "Aluminator" 5.0 Coyote. I couldn't swing the loan, but I damn sure would have loved to have had that car!!  I love driving my friend's 2016 650 hp ZO6 Corvette. My brother is considering buying a Hellcat Challenger. These new muscle cars are totally awesome, and if you can afford one, by all means buy one before the EPA and the safety Nazis find a way to outlaw them. And for ther millionth time, If you want to put an LS engine in a beater LeMans, or a 5.7 / 6.1 / 6.4 Hemi into a beater Duster or Satellite, or a Ford Coyote into a beater Mustang or Cougar no one cares!! Have fun!!  I just cringe when some idiot does it to a numbers-matching Judge, or a for-real, Six-Pack Super Bee, or a Shelby GT350!! And-yes I have seen these exact swaps in magazines or for sale in Hemmings or on the internet!!  Forget the monthly award, or a yearly award-Here's some winners of the "Asshole of the Century" award.  #1. This car was featured in two different buff magazines. This clown bought a one of 458 ever built, show-quality 455HO / 4-speed, 1972 Trans-Ams and butchered the body and interior, and put an LS engine and a six-speed automatic in it!!  Now why couldn't he have bought any one of the millions of beater 1970-81 Camaros and Firebirds out there and used that?  Or if he HAD to have a Trans-Am-he couldn't buy one of the nearly 300,000 built from 1977-79 and fuck that up? No it had to be one of 1,286 '72 models ever made!! ( The other 828 were automatics ). Hell-why didn't he buy one of the 252 SD-455 '73 models or one one of the 88 1970 RAIV models??!!!   # 2. This car was also featured in several buff magazines. This guy should have been dragged out into the street and shot and his house burned to the ground. He bought a pristine, numbers matching, show-quality 1963 Fuel-Injected, 327, 4-speed, Split-Window Corvette and gutted it, put a roll cage in it, a 454 with a Tunnel-Ram backed by a TH400 with a trans-brake, and a narrowed 9 inch Ford rear and 33 inch slicks for a "Pro Street" theme!!!  Again-he couldn't have bought one of the millions of small-block '68-82 'Vettes out there that no one cares about and butchered that? Or if he "Had" to have the '63-67 body-there was a Kit Car company selling 1963 "Gran Sport" replica bodies that fit on to the '68-82 chassis, or he could have bought a beater '64-67 model and people wouldn't have been nearly as pissed off.  But a numbers-matching, fuelie, Split-Window??  Again-the only thing worse might have been a for-real fuel-injected '57 'Vette, or maybe one of the 116 '69 L88 models!!!  # 3. This guy pissed off GM and Ford Guys alike, by putting a 389 Pontiac engine into a pristine '57 T-Bird!!  Yes, it was faster than the ancient 312 "Y-Block".  If he wanted more performance he couldn't have at least went with a 390 Ford??  Or a 302 / 351W / C4 combo?  # 4. This guy managed to get TWO groups of enthusiasts storming his house with torches-musclecar guys and import tuners alike-because he managed to slaughter not one, but TWO sacred cows!!. This genius put the engine and drivetrain out of a 1998 Toyota Supra Turbo into a 1967 Camaro!!  And he really couldn't understand why everyone wanted to kill him!!  # 5. This dope spent $250,000-that's not a typo-I didn't mean 25K-were talking a quarter million-building a 1970 Chevelle with a Duramax Turbo Diesel engine and Allison transmission out of a modern GMC Truck!!!  Why??  I think the question should be-like the puppet dictator in "Team America" asked-"Why is everybody so F%^kin' Stupid??"  Or why specifically are American Car enthusiasts so willing to butcher classic Iron!!  I've said it before-you never see a 1967 Jaguar XKE with the engine and tranny out of a 2012 XKR or a 1969 Porsche 911S with the powertrain out of a 2014 Carrera 4, or a 1971 Datsun 240Z with the drivetrain out of a 2010 370Z!!. You don't see a 1957 Harley-Davidson Sportser with the fuel-injected engine and six-speed out of a 2011 Softail, or a 1973 Kawasaki Z1 with the powertrain out of a 2012 ZX-14 Ninja, or a 1969 Honda CB750 with the engine and tranny out of a 2005 CBR!!  You don't go to a gun show and see a WWII vintage Colt .45 with Laser Sights on it!!  So if you want to put a Supercharged "5.0" Coyote into a '71 Maverick, go ahead!!  But please don't do it to one of the 1,806 "Boss 351" Mustangs ever made!!  Are we finally clear on this issue? Mastermind                              

"The Fate of the Furious"...should be..."No more, Please!!"

Took my 13 year old nephew to see the "Fate of the Furious" and even he said the action had too much CGI and was way over the top, and that they need to quit. The old saying-"Out of the mouths of babes.." is true. They should have quit three movies ago. The 4th one was alright with Dom and Brian ( the late Paul Walker ) going to Mexico to avenge Letty's murder. The car action was mostly do-able. The fifth one was unnecessary-and them dragging the safe through the streets of Brazil was a little over the top. 6 and 7 were awful. Paul Walker died in a car wreck before the 7th film was finished, and they should have just scrapped it. They didn't, and since it grossed a gazillion dollars-we knew an 8th installment was inevitable. I just can't buy into it. First off-how did "Dominic Toretto" ( Vin Diesel ) morph from street racing thug into James Bond?  In the last three movies-Hobbs- ( Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson ) and then "Mr Nobody " ( Kurt Russel ) recruit him and his buddies to save the world from terrorists and master criminals and nuclear disasters. Really? The FBI, the CIA, Homeland Security, and the entire U.S. Military is helpless-but Diesel and his crew can stop these international criminal masterminds? Puhleeze. And wait-Dom and Brian went and killed the drug dealer "Braga" in F&F 4 because his henchmen had killed Letty ( Michelle Rodriguez ) Dom's longtime love. But wait-she re-appears in F&F 6 with the soap-opera theme-she wasn't dead, she had amnesia and couldn't remember who she was!! So now she and Dom are married and having their honeymoon in Cuba. This is where "Cypher" ( Charlize Theron with hair extensions-why she needed them is beyond me-she's smokin' hot regardless of hairstyle ) recruits Dom to do dirty deeds with something that she has on her cell-phone. It's never explained who she is or where she came from, or why she's a master computer hacker that wants to steal nuclear weapons. So Dom turns on his friends and helps her steal a nuclear device, leaving the Rock to go to jail-that's never explained-he's a hotshot FBI agent with a high security clearance and he was asked to steal the device before Cypher could get it! Dom also steals launch codes from a Russian diplomat because-surprise-remember the hot Brazilian cop that he had an affair with in F&F 5 and most of 6, before cruelly dumping her for the back-from-the-dead, amnesiac Letty? Guess What? Cypher has her and her maybe 6 month old baby hostage-and the baby is Dom's!!  Huh? F&F 5 was released in 2011, and F&F 6 was released in 2012. F&F 7 was being filmed in 2013 when Paul Walker died, and they re-shot some scenes and delayed the release from 2014 to 2015. Anyhow-the kid would be five or six years old at least-unless Dom was cheating on Letty with his former flame-who in F&F 7-they implied she was having a relationship with the Rock!! Remember him shielding her and crashing out the window after he and Jason Statham had their big fight??!!  So he goes to New York to rip off launch codes for the nuclear device. This scene is ludicrous-Cypher can hack into cars and make them drive themselves!!! So she remotely causes about a hundred car wrecks, even dropping cars out of tall parking garages to derail the Russians' motorcade. Dom's buddies show up to try to stop him,-including Jason Statham-who was the villian in #7-but is now working with the good guys- and Letty takes the briefcase with the launch codes and runs. Because Dom didn't shoot his own wife, Cypher kills the hot Brazilian girl and threatens to do the baby if Dom crosses her again. Next they go to Russia to steal a nuclear submarine-where again-where in the hell is the Russian Military, the U.S. Military, NATO forces, etc-the Rock and the rest of Dom's pals have this cars vs trucks, snowmobiles, and planes, and yes-the submarine on the frozen Tundra of remote Russia. Dom and crew save the day, and everyone lives happily ever after. And Letty happily welcomes this baby that he had with the other woman!! Right. The first 4 were ok with the street racing being funded by electronics theft and drugs, etc. But now-what's next "Furious in Outer Space??"  The sad thing is-if this stinker grosses 100 million or more-which it probably will-that means there will be an F&F 9 and 10!! God, I hope not.  Mastermind    

Ya gotta love the internet.....Part 2...

Got a smart-ass email from someone-I love this-"Unknown" who didn't sign his work-but wanted to gripe about a post I made like 3 years ago!!  I was griping about how tired I was of seeing in every buff magazine-which I sarcastically said-should change their name to "Modern Fuel Swap Monthly" since all they ever featured was Numbers-matching SS396 Chevelles, GTOs,Dodge Chargers,etc-with LS motors and modern Hemis swapped in. I've said it a million times-If you want to put an LS motor and a 4L80E in a beater '68 Cutlass-go ahead and do it!! No one gives a shit. But don't do it to one of the 515 Hurst / Olds models ever built!!  Anyhow this arrogant asshole-their always so arrogant-chided me by saying that LS motors AREN'T CHEVYS and If I was as smart as I thought I was, I'd know that!!  Would he like to go for Double Jeopardy where the scores can really change?  The LS engine is a Chevrolet design from conception to production. They debuted in the 1997 Corvette, the '98 Z /28 / Trans-Am, and the 2000 Chevy / GMC Pickups. The fact that they put them in Pontiacs, Buicks, and Oldsmobiles-doesn't change the fact that they are Chevys! Just like the 3.8 / 3800 V6 that powers millions of GM cars is a Buick. The Northstar V8s-while available in Oldsmobiles-was a Cadillac design. The Quad 4-was a Pontiac. This is nothing new. GM has played musical engines since the '60's. The standared engine in most GM cars-be it a Firebird, LeMans, Cutlass, Regal, Ventura, Omega, etc-since 1967 was a 250 inch Chevy straight six. In the late '70's it became the 231 inch Buick V6. In 1977 alone you could get a Pontiac Firebird with a 231 inch Buick V6, a 301 Pontiac, a 305 Chevy, a 350 Chevy, a 350 Olds, a 350 Pontiac, a 350 Buick, A 400 Pontiac, and a 403 Olds!!!  Only the one 350 and the 400 were "True" Pontiac engines-i.e-dating back to the original 287 inch V8 from 1955-and sharing parts with the 326-455 engines that were so prevalent from the '63-79 period!!  You could buy an Olds Cutlass in the '80's with a 305 Chevy,a 301 Pontiac, or a 307 Olds V8. In the early 90's you could buy a Cadillac Fleetwood D' Elegance or Buick Roadmaster with a 350 Chevy!!  Yes-GM played musical engines for 40 years because of smog laws and less "model proliferation"-does anyone believe that an Olds Bravada was anything other than a re-badged S10 Blazer??!!!  But your 1992 Cadillac Fleetwood does not have a 5.7 liter "Cadillac" V8!!!  It's a 350 Chevy just like the one in your neighbor's Blazer!!!  Anyhow- I welcome all input-even misguided or inaccurate wise-ass comments. But if your going to be sarcastic-do some research and make damn sure your right before you publiucly rebuke someone who HAS done the research!!!  Mastermind  

R.I.P. Pete Chapouris....

I was saddened to hear about the recent passing of Pete Chapouris due to a stroke. He was 76. He was a major partner in "Pete&Jakes" a company that sold street rod and hot rod parts-straight axles with disc brakes for '55-57 Chevys, block hugger headers, rack and pinion steering setups etc.  However he's probably best known as the builder of the "California Kid" the Iconic black and flamed '34 Ford driven by Martin Sheen in the movie-duh-"The California Kid".  It was made in 1974 for ABC TV as a "movie of the week"-they had that back then. It was a simple revenge tale, set in 1958 but it had a lot of star power. Vic Morrow was a sadistic small-town sheriff who ran speeders off the curvy mountain road outside his town in his hopped up Hemi-powered cop car. Ironically-this followed his turn as a-you guessed it-maniacal sheriff chasing Peter Fonda and Susan George in "Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry." Talk about typecasting. Martin Sheen was the older brother of one of his victims who comes to town seeking vengenance. Nick Nolte was the bullied town mechanic who teams up with Sheen to get the sheriff after his own little brother is killed, in an "accident" running away from Morrow. Michelle Phillips is both sexy and sad as a lonely waitress who wants to have an affair with Sheen, but circumstances don't allow it. The final showdown on the country road plays well even today. Although it was a low-budget made for TV flick-it was a huge hit, and really boosted Martin Sheen's career. He went on to star in "Apocalypse Now" and many other movies, as well as playing the president on the hit TV show "The West Wing".  Nick Nolte went on to stardom in "Rich Man, Poor Man", "The Deep" and "48 Hrs".  Michelle Phillips was on the "Dallas"-spin-off  "Knots Landing" in the '80s. Sadly, Vic Morrow was killed in 1982 while filming a "Twilight Zone" movie. A helicopter in an action scene crashed, killing the pilot,Morrow, and two child actors who were in the scene. Anyhow the movie has a "cult" following to this day, and the car still exists-you see it at a lot of hot rod shows, escpecially in southern California. Pete was a pioneer who showed that "Old School" was still cool, and remained active in racing and hot rodding until his untimely demise. May he rest in Valhalla!  Mastermind

If you want the most "Bang" for the buck, then learn the nuances of your chosen car line....

With modern cars having so much computer-controlled electronic ignition and fuel management, automatic shift points etc-"Tuning" is becoming a lost art. However-if you have an old musclecar it can make a huge difference in performance. Even on a stock engine-bad tuning can cost you 40-50 hp. And every engine line is different in what they need and "like".  My dad worked for GM and Ford for years, and I did too, as well as Chrysler. If you want to read old tech articles by Dick Landy,Nunzi Romano,Smokey Yunick, Carroll Shelby, etc-you'll see that what I'm telling you came from the old masters, as well as personal experience. Here's some tips you won't see in the modern buff magazines-because their writers don't know it!! Some of these engines were out of production before the editor was born!!  # 1. Pontiacs like a lot of timing and a lot of fuel. They always have. Many years ago-Popular Hot Rodding had a project car called "Project '32". It was a '32 Ford 5 window that they'd stuffed a Ram Air IV 400 Pontiac and TH400 in out of a staffers wrecked GTO. Needless to say-it was badass-it ran low 12s on street tires and high 11s on slicks-in the mid-70's. They discovered that it ran even stronger when they replaced the Quadrajet with a 1000cfm Carter Thermo-Quad, and went richer than stock on the jetting. It ran stronger still when they kept bumping the timing, finally losing power at 42 degrees total advance!!  The now defunct High Performance Pontiac magazine had similar results. They tested a strong 455 HO that they built. It had a custom 850 cfm Quadrajet with a larger .149 needle and seat. They got the most performance at 38 degrees total-after losing power at 40. However-they were using 91 octane pump gas, and PHR was using 104 octane race gas. Still-the engine liked a lot more timing than stock. They also found that hp and torque increased at every rpm by increasing fuel pressure. The hp and torque numbers were still rising at 9 psi- (which is a lot for a carburated engine; I know modern fuel-injected engines run 40 psi or more ) when they went to 11 and blew the needle and seat off the carb!!  My Judge ran high 11s with two 750 cfm Carter AFBs on an Offenhauser Dual-Quad intake, and it had a stock mechanical fuel pump on the engine, and a Carter Electric pump in the trunk-one pushing, one pulling- and a 1/2 inch fuel line. No one who ever drove or rode in this car would say it was over-carburated!!  Remember-a 455 Pontiac needs more juice than 327 Chevy!!  So if you have a GTO or Firebird or whatever-taking the time to play with timing, jetting, and fuel pressure will easily add 30-40 hp when you finally get it right. # 2. Fords are notoriously under-carburated. The Autolite 4bbl used on 289 Mustangs and other '60's Fords-even 390s-flows about 470 cfm. Carroll Shelby bumped the hp from 271 to 306 on the 1965 289 GT350 simply by adding tri-y headers and a 715 cfm Holley on an aluminum intake. And the buff magazines said that was under-rated-they thought it was putting out closer to 350 hp!  The Autolite 4100 and 4300 are the worst carbs ever built, bar none. I've said before-in the early '70's if you had a Mustang or a T-Bird with cold-starting problems, stumbling, etc-and bitched hard enough-dealers would replace them with a 600 cfm Holley and warranty it!! Now think about this-the performance of your 429 or 460 inch T-Bird is vastly improved with a 600 cfm carb??!!  If you have an automatic transmission I would recommend the 750 cfm Edelbrock Performer as the "default" carb-they come off the line very cleanly-which is important in an automatic transmissioned car-you can't rev them up at the line to "clean them out". They won't over-carb a hot 302, and they'll feed a 390 / 428 or 429 /460 just fine. If you have a manual transmission-then dual 600 Edelbrocks give 452 hp on a 390-more than the 418 registered by the Performer RPM single-quad. Or you can use a 750 or 850 double-pumper Holley on your hot 351, 390, 428 / 429 or whatever-with a stick you can launch at whatever rpm you desire. I've seen Edelbrock and Barry Grant dual-quad and tri-power setups work great even on a 289 with the right cam, gears, etc. Think about it-a 351C or 390 Ford V8 with a 470 cfm carb is like a 250 lb NFL running back trying to run while breathing through a straw!!  Don't go overboard-but I think you get the picture. # 3. Mopars are also badly Under-carburated. The original Carter AVS 4bbl that was used on most Mopars until 1971-only flowed about 585 cfm. They had crisp throttle response-a smaller carb will do that at low-speeds and in the mid-range-but at the sacrifice of quite a bit on the top end. 585 cfm is a little small for a stock 340; for a 383, 400 or 440 it's laughable. Luckily-Edelbrock offers an 800 cfm "Thunder AVS" carb that would be just the ticket. If your car is a '71 or '72 and later with a Carter Thermo-Quad, and it's not warped or cracked ( the bakelite bodies sometimes do ) you can rebuild that-they flow 750 cfm. Summitt offers remanufactured Thermo-Quads in 750 and 850 cfm versions. Or you could use an Edelbrock Manifold and the 800 AVS,-their adjustable secondarys are perfect for an automatic- or if you have a stick-an 850 Holley-especially on a 383 or 440 with a big cam and stiff gears-will rock. Or you could go with a Six-Pack setup or dual-quads. # 4. "Rat" motors need to breathe. I've said it before-and it's true-nothing makes more power for less money than a big-block Chevy. Since engines are basically an air pump-it's true to some extent with all engines-but a Rat will really "wake up" with additonal breathing-headers, cam, and carb and intake. With the possible exception of an 8:1 engine with an automatic and 2.73:1 gears-it's almost impossible to over-cam or over carburate a Rat. Stick to the guidelines of the cam manufacturers-they'll tell you "needs 3.42:1 or stiffer gears and 2,500 rpm converter" or needs at least 750 cfm carb, etc."  Again-think of the 454 as a 275 lb NFL lineman-trying to breathe through a straw!  This is very basic stuff-but sticking to basics can get you a big edge in real-world performance!!  Mastermind              

You have to accept some harsh realities when your buying and restoring a musclecar....

I talk to a lot of people who don't want to accept the realities of classic cars and what it takes to restore or maintain them. They often take on projects that are too much for their finances or mechanical ability or both. Then their disillusioned and angry when they lose money on a project or can't finish it. Here's some good advice to avoid this problem. The first and foremost rule is: Don't expect to make a profit. If you want to go into the business of selling used cars-then do it. But if your buying or building your dream car-then resign yourself to the fact that your out "X" amount of dollars-whether it's $10,000 or $100,000. Chances are-you'll have more in the car than you can ever sell it for. But if you love it, and don't want to sell it, then that doesn't matter. That aside-here's some irrefutable facts that will save you a ton of money and aggravation. # 1. Like it or not-Chevys-and by proxy-other GM stuff are the most popular cars, and are the easiest and cheapest to restore. Nothing makes more power for less money than a small or big-block Chevy. 340 /360 Mopars, 351 Fords, 350 Olds, and 360 AMCs can make as much or more power than a 327 / 350 Chevy-at 1 1/2 times or double the cost. A Chrysler Hemi or Boss-Nine Ford can make as much or more power than a Rat motor-at 2 or three times the cost. A case in Point-the "454HO" GMPP 454 Crate engine makes 425 hp and 500 lbs ft of torque and retails for $5995. The Mopar Performance 426 Hemi crate engine makes 465 hp and 500 lbs of torque and retails for $14,995. You can get an extra 40 hp out of a 454 Chevy-with a better intake or a slightly larger cam-that would cost maybe 300 bucks, not 9 grand!! Pontiac engines are externally identical from a 326 to a 455. Olds engines from a 330 to a 403, and the 400-425-455 stuff all interchanges. Same for 400-430-455 Buicks. All BOP engines have the same bellhousing bolt-pattern. That means you can buy a TH350 out of a wrecked '73 Cutlass and put it behind a 389 Pontiac in a '66 GTO ( in place of an ST300 ) or a 400 in a 78 T/A and it will literally bolt in. Ditto for body and trim parts-a fender or hood, or 1/4 panel or whatever-is going to be cheaper for a Camaro or Chevelle, than it is for a "Cuda or Road Runner, and the Mopar parts are going to be cheaper than parts for an AMC Javelin! And because a lot of GM stuff interchanges- like suspension and brake parts, shocks, crossmembers, trans mounts, radiators, etc-anything that fits a Chevelle will fit a LeMans / GTO, a Cutlass, a Buick Skylark / Regal, and a Gran Prix or Monte Carlo. Anything that fits a Camaro / Firebird, will usually fit a Nova-and a Ventura, Omega or Apollo. Lust after, buy, and restore anything you want-but a Mopar is going to cost more than a Chevy or a Pontiac, and a Ford-especially anything other than a Mustang- is going to cost more than a Mopar. For example-a 302 Ford uses a different bellhousing bolt-pattern than a 351W, which is different than a 351C, which is different than a 390 / 428. And worse yet-unlike Chevys, Pontiacs and Mopars-where oil pans,water pumps, power steering pumps and brakcets, alternator brackets etc are all pretty much the same for many years for the whole line-or at least the small and big blocks-i.e-283-327-350-400, or 273,318,340-360 or 383-400-413-440, or 396-402-427-454, or 326-455-EVERY Ford is different!! In other words-a 390 in a Mustang uses a different oil pan than a 390 in an LTD, which is different than a 390 in a T-Bird, which is different than an F150 Pickup!!  I'm not bashing Fords-I'm just saying that they don't have anywhere near the parts interchangeability of GM and Chrysler stuff-which makes them harder and more expensive to buy parts for. It's just a fact of the business. If your a sports-car nut-it's going to cost less to restore a Datsun 240Z than it is a Porsche 911. The 911 is going to cost less than a Ferarri 308 GTS, and the Ferarri is going to cost less than a Lamborghini Countach!! Get the picture?  And being mad about it isn't going to help!  Mastermind          

Want to find your dream car and save a mint? Lower your sights just a smidgen....

I monitor prices of musclecars all over the net from junkers to frame-off restorations and I'm still amazed at the prices of some of the "premium" cars. Like Nicholas Cage said in the "Gone in 60 Seconds" re-boot-"There's too many assholes out there with too much money. " Here's a couple that left me shaking my head. If I could afford these cars-I'd have bought the lower-priced "lesser" versions. Even if I'd just won the lottery. # 1. On the same website-I saw a restored, numbers-matching, 4-speed, LS6 454 1970 SS Chevelle for $139,000!!  They also had a restored, numbers-matching, 4-speed, L78 396 1969 SS Chevelle for $59,000!!!  They both looked pristine from all the pictures and videos the site had. If you don't know-the L78 and the LS6 share the same compression ratio,solid-lifter cam,rectangular-port heads,780 Holley carb, etc. The only difference is the cubes-396 / 402 vs 454. And the horsepower difference is less than you think. The LS6 is rated at 450, and the L78 at 375. However-the L78 was rated at 425 hp in the 1965 Corvette and some 1965 Impala SS's. The 1966-69 version is identical. It was down-rated because prior to 1970-for some insane reason-maybe insurance rates-GM didn't want their intermediates to have an engine over 400 cubes,or less than a 10 lb per hp ratio. So in a Chevelle it had "only" 375 hp. Pontiac did this too-the Ram Air III 400 had 366 hp in a GTO and only 335 in a Firebird, the RAIV grossly under-rated at 370 in a GTO and 345 in a Firebird!! Maybe because you could get a 426 Hemi or a 440 in a Road Runner, Charger, or Challenger / Cuda, and a 428 in a Mustang-GM allowed the big dogs for 1970-the 454s and 455s. Further-the LS6 was slated to be available in the Camaro and the Nova, but was ultimately only put in the Chevelle line. Except the intake manifold was lowered to clear the low hoodline of the new for 1970 Camaro. The 1970 LS6 intake is so flat that the fuel flows uphill from the carb. The taller, L78 / L72 396 / 427 manifold from '66-69 is worth 15-20 hp MORE than the 454 intake!!  So the percieved power difference is really not that much. In fact-in a real-world drag race the winner would be determined by gearing-i.e.-3.31:1 vs 4.11:1 and traction-whoever got a better launch more than real-world power difference!!  Is 50 cubes worth another $80,000??!!!  Not in my pocket book-even if I'd just won Megabucks in Vegas!! The L78 was a way better deal!! They also had a pristine, LS5 ( 360 hp ) 454 '70 SS for $69,000!! 70K cheaper!! Maybe a grand for an Edelbrock Torker intake and matching cam and carb-and you'll have LS6 performance and save the other 69K!! On the same website they had a pristine 1969 440 Plymouth GTX for $59,000. They also had a pristine 1970 440 Six-pack GTX for $99,000!! Huh? Do you people realize that Edelbrock still sells the manifold, Holley still sells the carbs, and Mopar Performance still sells the throttle linkage and air cleaner? And the whole shebang would cost about 2 grand?  A manifold and carburators are worth 40G's??!!  Again, not for me!!  Trans-Am specialties in Florida had a pristine Buccaneer Red, L75 455, 4-speed '73 T/A for sale for $49,000. They also had a Buccaneer Red SD-455, 4-speed '73 for $149,000!!!  I know-there was only 252 SDs built. But a 100K price difference? I guarantee if you drove them both-you wouldn't feel a $100k difference. They also had an automatic '74 SD-455 T/A-one of 943 built-for $79,000!!  Again-the engine is worth 30 grand?  When for about 2 grand-you could put the Edelbrock Performer RPM Top-End kit-which is basically RAIV aluminum heads, cam and the RPM intake on the "standard" 455 and have-according to Edelbrock-470 hp and 530 lbs of torque!! A helluva lot more than the SD's 290 and 395!!!  I can't see spending that kind of money just to say you have something rare. Of course, I don't have Jay Leno's bank account, but if I did, I don't think I'd be that frivoulous!!  Mastermind        

Good advice for buying and / or restoring a musclecar....

There's a show called "Property Virgins" on one of the cable channels where Real Estate agents help first-time home buyers avoid costly mistakes. Maybe we need something like that for car restorers. Anyhow-here's some good advice that will save you a ton of money and grief.  # 1. Make sure the car has a legal, clear title. This should be a no-brainer, but you'd be amazed at the number of people that buy stuff without a title, or a salvage title and then are furious when they can't get it registered or sell it or trade it in. Because a DMV clerk transposed 2 numbers 18 years ago-I had a helluva time-I had to get a lawyer-getting a clear replacement title for my 442 when I wanted to sell it-and I had  registered, insured, and driven the car for 18 years!! Nothing is a "deal" if you can't register it or sell it!!  # 2. Avoid "basket cases" or cars with major rust damage or water or fire damage. These cars are not a deal no matter how cheap they are. Fixing them will cost about five times what you think it will. Trust me, your way better off in terms of money saved and grief avoided, by just spending more money and getting a better car to start with. # 3. A rare or special car missing a major component is not a deal. Obvious examples would be a Hemi-powered Chrysler vehicle missing the Hemi engine or a Boss 302 or 429 Mustang missing the "Boss" engine. The cost of trying to find a replacement engine for one of these would be so prohibitive that even if you had an unlimited bakroll-your better off just searching for a complete car. Think about it-Where in the hell are you going to find a complete, for-real "Boss 429" engine for sale, at any price? I'm sure some of you are saying right now-"Well, Duh!" "Anyone knows that". Ok. What about a fuel-injected '57 Bonneville or '63 Corvette missing the fuel-injection system? Also-"Duh".  Then you'll consider buying an '87 Buick Grand National or '86 Mustang SVO that's missing the Turbo engine!!  Where are you going to find replacement back glass for a '71-73 "Boat-Tail" Riviera? Or a "Shaker" hood for a '74 GTO?  ( T/A resto shops sell the scoops; I'm talking about the HOOD with the whole in it, for the scoop, for a Ventura, not a Firebird. Good luck with that. ) Which brings up...#4. Unless you want to actually race it on the vintage racing circuit as a toy with a modern crate engine-avoid old race cars like the plague. To "restore" one to drivable,streetable condition is almost impossible. Their always gutted, and they always have an unoriginal engine and drivetrain. You buy a 1970 Pontiac Trans-Am race car. Your going to restore it to "Original" race specs? Guess what? You'll never in a million years find a 303 Pontiac engine. The SCCA allowed 302 Chevys because Canadian Firebirds had Chevy engines, but where are you going to find a 302 Chevy engine that '67-69 Z/28 restorers haven't hoarded?  Your best bet would be throw a small-block Chevy crate engine in it and have fun. Ditto for a Mustang or Challenger. Your not going to find a for-real 305 Mopar or Boss 302 race engine for sale at any price!! With Edelbrock or Trick Flow heads you could build a "Mock" Boss engine, and you could throw a 360 crate engine in the Dodge, but it'll never be "Original" like the ones Parnelli Jones and Sam Posey and Jerry Titus raced!!  The old saying-"If you want to make a million dollars racing, then start with two million" is true. # 5. Be honest about what your going to use the car for. If it's an investment or a show car, then do anything you want. But if your going to drive the car at all-then there's things you should consider. If it gets really hot where you live-Las Vegas, Arizona, Florida, etc-you get the picture. It might behoove you to get a car with working or at least repairable factory A/ C.  If you live in a big city with a lot of stop-n-go traffic-like San Francisco or Los Angeles-an automatic might be a better choice than a 4-speed. If you want a Corvette to cruise the wine country with your wife on weekends do you think a low-compression, hydraulic-cammed small-block model might a little more pleasant to drive ( especially on pump gas ) than an 11:1, solid-lifter, Tri-Power, 4.11:1 geared 427 model?  # 6.  "Run What You Brung". At least on your first project. Yes, it's possible to put a 460 based 514 stroker into a Fox-Bodied Mustang, but do you really want to attempt it?  Especially when I know guys running in the 11s with 302s!!  Manned space flight is possible, but it isn't cheap or easy!!  If you want a big-block 'Cuda, then step up to the plate and buy one that already has a 383 or 440 in it. Don't buy a 318 model and think you'll "Drop" a 440 in it later. After you buy a big-block crossmember,and radiator, torsion bars, swap the 904 Torqueflite for a 727, and replace the 8 1/4 rear with an 8 3/4 or Dana 60 and big-block springs....get the picture?  # 7. Pick the right car for the purpose. If you want to build a corner-carving "G" machine you'd be better off starting with a '75 Trans-Am than you would a '65 GTO! If you want to build a stompin' drag racing big-block Camaro-your better off with a '70's Camaro than you are an '80's IROC-Z. Why? 1st off-a Rat was an option until 1972-so it'll fit easily without a lot of custom fabrication, unlike the 3rd gen models. The 8.5 inch 10 bolt rear ends can take a lot of abuse. Unless you have a 700 hp motor and are running wrinkelwall slicks bolted to the rims-you probably won't have a problem. The 7.5 inchers in the later F-bodies break behind 165 hp 305s!!  Ditto for transmissions. A stock TH350 will hold up behind a 500 hp engine, as will a Muncie or BW 4-speed. The T5 5-speeds only had a 300 lb torque rating. They wouldn't last at all behind a Rat. 200R4s and 700R4s can live behind a Rat, but only after they've been significantly beefed up by a pro tranny shop. See what I'm saying?  #8. Avoid "Niche" exotics and old Kit Cars. They may sound cool in theory-but again-if your going to drive the car at all, eventually it'll need repairs. Where are you going to find a master cylinder for a Sunbeam Tiger? A heater core for a Pantera?  Brake Pads for a Mangusta? Anything for a Bricklin?   Are you really going to go 100+ mph in a "Manta Ray" or "Kelmark GT" that some clown built 30 years ago with a Pinto front end and a Corvair swing axle?  I wouldn't!!  Hope this helps people avoid "Money Pits". Mastermind                                

Ya gotta love the internet....For entertainment value at least!!!

I never got this memo-but somewhere there has to be internet etiquette guidelines that read like this. # 1. If something early in a post rubs you the wrong way, stop reading and vent your anger immediately. # 2. Use profanity so the writer knows you mean business. Racial slurs and homophobic comments will show how intelligent you are. # 3. If the writer responds with proof that you are wrong-i.e.-by citing a sentence or paragraph that you failed to read, you are under no obligation to publicly apologize. This is the internet. You can silently slink away until you decide to pop up again like a noxious weed and spew your hateful venom on someone else.  I say this because some people were apparently mortally offended that I said that under certain conditions-a '66 GTO could beat a '66 Hemi Charger in a drag race, and that a 389 / 400 / 421 / 455 Pontiac was a better STREET engine than a 426 Hemi, or a 427 Ford or a 427 Chevy. I was also "Terminally Stupid" by saying that sometimes "faster" cars can lose to "slower" ones. Well, I feel the need to educate these poor souls. Yes-427 Chevys and Fords and 426 Hemis dominated NASCAR and drag racing in the '60's. Their power-making ability is undisputed. However-If you want to read old road tests-Popular Hot Roddings '69 Hemi Charger road test-they were the people who said the car felt like it was running with one flat tire. It had a Torqueflite and 3.23:1 gears-and they couldn't break out of the 14s. They said it went quicker by keeping it in 2nd till the end of the 1/4, and that it needed more converter and 4.10:1 gears to hit it's full potential!!  Hot Rod tested an L88 '69 Corvette and were disappointed that in ran high 13s-2 seconds from where "It should be". This was their own words. The L88 had a TH400 and 3.36:1 gears. The writer said they griped at the Chevy test fleet-and later tested one with a 4-speed and 4.56:1 gears that ran lows 12s. Bully for them.  4.56:1 gears?? The engine buzzing at 4,000 rpm on the freeway-that makes for a pleasant driving experience!!  The Hemis and the 427s and Boss Nines are great RACING engines, and under full-race conditions, no the Pontiacs can't make anywhere near that power level. Neither can the 390 / 428 Fords, 383 / 440 Mopars, and 400 / 455 Olds V8s!!   But for STREET driving-the smaller heads etc-build massive low-end torque and will run faster in a drag race / "Stoplight Gran Prix " than these monsters-especially with street tires, mild gearing, and full exhaust systems!!  I want to ask these people-are they 12? Do you have a bumper sticker of "Calvin" ( from the comic strip "Calvin&Hobbes" ) pissing on a Chevy or Ford emblem?  I love the guy who said there was absolutely no way that my Judge could have beaten my friend's 440 / Six-Pack Super Bee in a drag race. Really? You don't think that even bone-stock, a car with 366 hp, a 4-speed and 4.33:1 gears, can get a car length or two off the line and hold onto that lead against a car with 390 hp, an automatic and 3.23:1 gears?  What math are you doing? And-here's the kicker- the RAIII 400 in my Judge wans't stock. It had Hooker Headers, a hotter than stock Crane Cam and roller rockers, an Offenhauser dual-quad intake with two AFBs, and it also had Lakewood coil-spring traction bars and N50X15 Mickey Thompson hot-n-sticky "Street Slicks ". And the guy I bought it from had a bunch of 12.01, 12.03, 12.05 timeslips from a dragstrip in California in the glovebox, and the best one was an 11.79!!  So yeah bud, I'm lying-there's no way that car could beat a bone-stock, automatic, 3.23:1 geared Six-Pack Super Bee running on GR70-15 Sears Radials!!  Who the hell am I kidding? Because a Pontiac can't beat a Mopar, ever right?  Ditto for the clown who said I was "Dreaming" when I said I beat a kid in a '67 SS 427 Impala in my dad's '65 2+2.  Because again-a 376 hp ( stock rating ) 421 powered Catalina with Tri-power,ported '67 GTO heads, ( which had 2.11 / 1.77 valves and bigger ports than the 1.96 / 1.66 "Bathtub" heads ) a "744" cam with 1.65:1 rockers, ( upgraded from the "068" cam and 1.5 rockers ) a TH400 with a TransGo shift kit and a 3.90:1 Posi rear-couldn't possibly outrun a bone-stock Quadrajet 390 hp 427 Impala with 3.31:1 gears!!  Because Big-block Chevys rule, and everything else sucks, right?  The best-though was the guy who said I was "Delusional" when I said that I used to beat '80's "5.0" Mustangs and 400, 4-speed 70's T/A's in my 403 Olds / TH350 powered '77 T/A. I've said before that my T/A had headers and a Holley Street Dominator intake,a custom Carb Shop Jetted Q-Jet, upgraded ignition and a TransGo shift kit. I've also said that it would run 14.9s all day, and it's best ever was a 14.78. If you read road tests of 400, 4-speed, WS6 disco-era T/A's-the fastest was  Hot Rod running a 14.61  and the slowest was Road&Track running a 15.62. ( I guess you could include Hot Rod's July 1978 DKM "Macho T/A" that ran a 14.29-but it was modified; this clown was saying stockers would have stomped my ass ) . If you read road tests of  '87-93 "5.0" Mustangs ( enthusiasts agree these are faster than the '83-86 carburated models ) the fastest was a 14.72 and the slowest a 15.29. So me saying my car that ran consistent 14.9s regularly beat these people or gave them a run for the money they'd never forget-is a bald-faced lie. Ok. And of course there's never driver error, right?  Like the guy in the LS6 Chevelle who got beat by my buddies L34 396 Chevelle, because he totally fried his tires all the way through 1st and 2nd, and by the time he caught traction, my pal was too far ahead!!  But again-were lying because there's no possible way a 396 Chevelle can beat a 454 Chevelle, right?  Like I've said so many times, read the WHOLE article, not just snippets, before you start telling someone how wrong they are!!  Mastermind       

Learn the difference between "Street" and "Race"....And "Bigger" isn't always "Better....

Had some people quoting buff magazine dyno tests after the post on generic engine building guidelines. Do these people ever read the WHOLE article?  One quoted a recent Car Craft single-plane vs dual-plane intake comparo. He didn't understand why the writer said that of all the single-planes, the Edelbrock Torker II offered the most "bang" for the buck for the average guy, even though the hp and torque champ was a Dart / Keith Dorton intake. I understand fully-because I read the whole article, not the just power and torque numbers!!  The test mule was an 11.4:1 compression 406 small-block Chevy with 215cc ( intake port volume ) aluminum heads,1 7/8 headers,and a solid roller cam with 242 / 240 ( @.050 ) duration and .594 lift!!  On THAT combo-yes-the taller than a Victor Jr NASCAR-spec Dart intake made the most power!! However-99% of the people reading the article aren't going to have a combo that radical-11.5:1 compression and a cam with .600 lift??!!  The writer explained that the Torker II would work just as well on a basically stock 8.5:1 350 with stock 153cc heads and a mild cam, or a 10:1 383 with 205cc heads and a hot cam. He was saying unless you went hog-wild-like the test mule-that it was almost impossible to out-power the Torker II, which made it the best deal for mild or wild combos. Another area where bigger is not always better is cylinder heads. Most people don't understand the concept of combustion. Once the cylinders are fully charged, their fully charged!!  Example-if you have a one-gallon bucket-and your filling it from a five-gallon or ten gallon bucket-guess what-when the ond-gallon bucket is full, it's full!! Doesn't matter how much you have left in your bucket. And if you keep filling it-any more is going to be wasted and spill out onto the ground! That's the simplest, best analogy I can make. Understand it?  Several years ago Car Craft built identical 454 Chevy engines-same compression, cam, headers, carb and intake, etc. The only difference was one had "standard" oval-port heads and the other had "High-Performance" rectangular port heads. Guess what?  The rectangular port heads did not show a noticeable gain on the dyno until 6,300 rpm!!  Think about that-now on a street engine or even in a race car-how often are you going to be above 6,300 rpm??  In another one Hot Rod had a ZZ4 350 Chevy that they puit some 210cc Trick Flow heads on. Yes they showed a 40 hp gain-at 6,100 rpm. Here's the kicker though-the "antiquated" stock, 163cc L98 heads were within 5 hp and 5 lbs ft of torque at every rpm up to 4,600!! At some rpms there was no difference, or it was only 1 or 2 hp and 1 or 2 lbs ft.  Again-in most situations-how often are you above 4,700 rpm?  The guy who wrote a book on building high-performance Pontiac engines has a '71 LeMans 455 wagon that runs 11.30s with a Quadrajet, 165cc heads and 3.55:1 gears!! It has Ram Air IV replica cam with 231 / 240 ( @.050 ) duration and .470 lift.  He shifts it at 5,700 rpm.  How is that possible?  Simple-he just accentuated what Pontiac did from the factory-make massive power and torque at low rpm. When you have 500 lbs of torque at 2,500 rpm, you don't NEED to rev to 7 grand!!  He just put together the perfect combination. Since stock Pontiac heads don't breathe much over 6,000 rpm or .480 lift-he doesn't NEED a cam with .575 lift!! With a Pontiac V8-less is more, more often than not. That's why Pontiacs were such awesome STREET engines. While Chevy, and Ford and Mopar were trying to homologate NASCAR engines-the 427s, and the 426 Hemi-etc. The "Little GTO" with small "Bathtub" heads and only 389 inches ruled the street. Again-with 424 lbs ft of torque at 2,700 rpm-you don't need to rev high. Port velocity, and cylinder filling. Remember the one-gallon bucket? That's why a '66 GTO with a 389 could run off and leave a '66 Charger with a Hemi from a light. Especially if the Charger had an automatic and 3.23:1 gears or even a 4-speed and 3.54:1s. Because the Hemi was designed to go 200 mph at Daytona, not rip ass on the street!! With stock gearing it was like running with one flat tire. Testers wouldn't get out of 2nd with Torqueflites or 3rd with 4-speeds by the end of the 1/4!! Now if the Hemi had a 4-speed and 4.30:1 gears, or a 2,500 rpm converter and 4.10:1s, it would have been a very different story, because the mechanical advantage would have got the Hemi into it's powerband quick enough to pass the Goat before the end of the 1/4.  This is how "faster" cars sometimes lose to "slower" ones. This is why many magazines said that the 383 and 440 engines were better on the street than a Hemi. This is why the 428 "FE" is a much better street engine than a Boss 429. I know a guy who bought a "Boss 302" Ford SVT stroker crate engine a few years ago and put it in his '69 Mustang that had an automatic and 3.25:1 gears. He was severely disappointed. It wouldn't idle-and didn't have much bottom-end-in fact it didn't do much below 4,000 rpm. The problem? I can't remember if it was a 347 or a 363-but it was the biggest, baddest one they had in the catalog at the time. It was rated at 450+ hp. I asked him-when you read the brochure and Ford recommended a stick or a torque converter with a 3,500 rpm stall speed and 4.56:1 gears-didn't that throw up a red flag that it might be a little too radical for a daily driver??!!  Why didn't you buy one of the 360 hp or 385 hp 351Ws that would have kicked ass on the street?  "Well, I just went for the one with the most power."  "Guess I should have done some more research."  You think?  A 3,000 rpm B&M converter and some 4.10:1 gears made it much more tractable and livable on the street, and it was really fast when you got on it, but he still didn't like the loose converter around town and the motor buzzing at 3,500 rpm on the freeway too much!!  So remember "Bigger is not always better ". Hope this helps save people from buying parts they'll be disappointed in!  Mastermind                 

Where does Charlize Theron from the new "Furious" fit on the all-time list? Too early to tell....

A couple times over the past few years people have enjoyed debating my list of the "Hottest Women in Musclecar / Action / Car Chase movies". Had quite a few people ask where I would rank Charlize Theron. If you live in a cave-she was the female lead in the "Mad Max" Fury Road epic last year, and she's the villain in the 8th "Fast&Furious" movie according to the trailers. Couldn't get too excited over "Fury Road". Tom Hardy's Max was a shell of the badass "Man with No Name" type revenger played by Mel Gibson. I mean he spent half the movie tied to the front of a car. Any ass-kicking that was done, was done by Charlize. I know it's not politically correct-but couldn't get turned on by Charlize with a shaved head and a prosthetic arm!! Sorry,just can't do it. Personally-I thought she was her absolute hottest as Keanu Reeves' doomed wife in "Devil's Advocate". I also liked her turn as the evil queen in "Snow White and the Huntsman". I want to meet the guy who kept her chained up naked and barefoot in the wagon-before Snow White's father saved her and married her, and sealed his doom!!  But I digress....All I've seen of the "Fate of the Furious" is the trailers. The action looks way too CGI-enhanced over the top, and all Vin Diesel does is scowl. Charlize does look smokin' hot with the hair extensions dressed in black tactical garb. I'll have to see the movie before I can give her a ranking. But judging from the previous "F&F" movies I seriously doubt if she's going to usurp Jennifer Billingsley, Susan George, Darlanne Fluegel, Jacqueline Bisset, Ali McGraw, or any of the other top-rankers on the list. Had some people gripe that I don't give modern ladies a fair shake. Not true. You have to take into account their performance and how it impacted the movie as a whole. If sheer hotness was all it took-then Raquel Welch would be the undisputed champ. The opening credits of "Fathom"-she doesn't say a word-but she's barefoot in bikini panties and a t-shirt and makes packing a parachute sexy as hell! No "Hannie Caulder" "Kansas City Bomber" and "Mother, Jugs, and Speed" are not classics by any means, but all Raquel had to do was stand there and breathe, and guys would watch. As for modern girls-I think Eva Mendes is smokin' hot and a pretty good actress. Gal Gadot is going to be awesome as "Wonder Woman" But does their 30 seconds in a bikini in "F&F 2" and "Fast Five" respectively top Darlanne Fluegel as "Ruth"-William Peterson's informant / hooker / parolee / girlfriend in "To Live and Die in L.A." who sets him and his partner up to rob a federal agent and tries to abscond with the money? The look on her face when his partner confronts her and says-"Your working for me now". is awesome. I love Scarlett Johansen, but has anything she's done in the "Avengers" "Lucy" or anything else compare to "Carol McCoy" the wife in "The Getaway"-played by Ali McGraw-who screwed a politician to secure Steve McQueen's release from prison, and then killed the guy when he was going to shoot Steve, and stayed with him through numerous car chases, gunfights and other mayhem?  Are you really going to argue that?  Are you going to say with a straight face that Jordana Brewster-woodenly pleading with Paul Walker and Vin Diesel-"Don't fight guys" "I love you both" through 5 movies ( she wasn't in 2Fast 2 Furious or "Tokyo Drift" ) tops "Shake-a-Puddin" from "White Lightning"- played flawlessly by Jennifer Billingsley-who knows she's a slut and doesn't care-tells Burt Reynolds "Roy isn't gonna be standin' there watchin' us"-referring to Bo Hopkins-her gangster boyfriend-while offering Burt a roll in the hay, and  isn't even offended when Burt sets her up for attempted rape by "Big Bear's" henchmen-she helps him escape and drives his wounded ass to a home for unwed mothers for medical attention. We find out that she gave up a child for adoption once. Jordana separating Walker and Diesel once a movie tops that?  There were some other gripes, but I have to refute them too. # 1. Smokey & The Bandit". She may have been the love of Burt Reynolds' life, but just can't excited over chipmunk cheeked Sally Field. "Gidget" "The Flying Nun". Can't do it.  # 2. "The Dukes of Hazzard". The AWFUL movie with Johnny Knoxville and Sean William Scott and Jessica Simpson. Jessica's horrible, phony, overdone southern accent was grating and annoying and the bikini scene fell flat as overly gratuitous even in a mindless comedy. Catherine Bach-the original "Daisy" was so smokin' hot that the producers made her wear pantyhose under the iconic shorts because they thought showing her bare legs could get them in trouble with the FCC!! ( Kind of like not showing Barbara Eden's abs / belly button on "I Dream of Jeannie" She could run around in the harem girl outfit with her nipples barely covered, saying stuff like "Please don't punish me, Master"-but a belly button is too damn much! ) Nope. Catherine all the way.  # 3. "The Getaway" ( 1994 Version ). Sorry fellas-a then 41 year old Kim Basinger-( still 3 years away from her Oscar win for "L.A. Confidential" ) while hot in a MILF / Cougar way-doesn't come close to the 24 year old Ali McGraw. Her and Steve McQueen had a torrid affair while filming-he left his wife and she left her husband-one of the producers of the film-that must have been awkward-and their chemistry ignited the screen. And Alec Baldwin trying to top the King of Cool?  Like MC Hammer said-"Can't touch this". He and Kim were married at the time, but they couldn't generate anywhere near the heat and passion that Steve and Ali did. # 4. "The Mechanic: Resurrection". Someone brought up this stinker sequel to the stinker re-make of the Charles Bronson classic. Since Arthur Bishop and Steve McKenna killed each other in the 1972 original-the fact that they made out like Bishop survived-obviously to leave room for a sequel-is offensive on it's own.  Jason Statham phones in his usual-"I'm a serious badass, so don't fuck with me" persona, and Jessica Alba-still smokin' hot,yes-but her wooden "damsel-in-distress" performance here makes her turn as a stripper in "Sin City" look Oscar-worthy by comparison. I thought Linda Cristal was way cooler in "Mr Majestyk". She drove the truck in the iconic chase-( footage was used in the "Built Ford Tough" ads for years after ) and helped Bronson take on the gangsters that were threatening him. Alba simply looked fetching and screamed while waiting for Statham to save her repeatedly. No comparison. Anyhow-we'll see in April how Charlize Theron rates-if she even does at all-on the all-time list. Mastermind