1972_Z-28

iTrader: (16)

I am like both, I get asked what's faster your new 02-Z28 bolt-ons or my 72-Z28 original LT1 and M20.
Of course we all know the answer.
I enjoy driving both and with enough money and time could make one dominate the other in everyway.
Looking at times recorded in the mid-60' thru early 70's in the quarter is hard to compare.
I had the chance to ride in a 70 GNX Stage 1, 455 BB stock and it was the first car to pin me to the seat. To bad it was on hard rubber 70's seriers tire.
Tire technology wasn't the best back in then.
I'm 45 and was out of the "new" muscle from early 80's till about 05, test drive a 02 pewter Z28 and enjoyed the it and still drive it today and having my 72 put completely back to it's glory.
They are different cars but the 2nd gens are great LS transplant cars, look badaxx and can be had and built and so many different ways.

LS1 Racing

iTrader: (15)

Great post!

I did a Vortec 4.8 swap into a restored '77 Camaro, and it was a great car. With headers and tune and the wretched 2.59 rear, it still ran mid 14's while getting nearly 30 MPG on the highway. It's just a shame the wife couldn't get comfy in it, so it had to go!

V8ImpSS

I agree with your thought process but not all things get better over time...we've established that styling was better when men designed cars with their hands not mice and keyboards

LS1 Racing

iTrader: (15)

It's a generalization.

06mistreSS

Definitely unique. I honestly don't have a problem with the FWD LS4 setup. Chevrolet wanted to change it up and put that V8 in there but wasn't about to go and change up all the drivetrain layouts etc. on these cars. Besides, all these cars were already FWD prior to the V8. It's a little odd seeing that V8 in there sideways at first, but it's unique and moves.

chaman

iTrader: (5)

Muscle is not dead, people. It EVOLVED. If you are not willing to evolve too you will never get it, like the OPs father, IMO.

Each era or period has its pro and cons...but muscle is still going strong.

indigo s10

iTrader: (2)

I definately agree with this. We have an LS4 Impala and an L33 Z71. The truck with some work, and tires could run with the 60's muscle cars(thank you LS motors), and the Impala will pin you to the seat, has seating for a family, can be driven in the snow, and gets 27-28 mpg on the highway. Sure, it can't slide around a corner, but it does get up and run. All that being said, give me a 68 GTO with big brakes, a modern chassis/suspension, big wheels(18's) sticky tires and an LSX engine under the hood backed by a 6 speed.

06RedRocket

At the risk of splitting hairs, I would say the PONY car wars are heating up, but the MUSCLE car era is dead. Muscle cars traditionally were defined as mid-size cars (like the Chevelle, GTO, Torino, Road Runners) with big engines. Pony cars were the 'cuda, Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger.

IMO, the muscle car was officially dead when GM killed the latest generation of the GTO. The Impala SS, and new Chargers are/were 4 door sedans and I would not call them muscle cars.

chaman

iTrader: (5)

Pony cars are a sub-class of muscle cars. I have news for you, the definition of muscle cars have changed through the years and 4 doors examples can very well be muscle cars. Even my 2006 SRT8 Dodge Magnum (a SW) is considered and classify as a muscle car (collectible one too) in recent books covering the matter.

Model16

Yeah I was gonna say..A pony car is a type of muscle car.....you take a small *** car and put in a big *** motor..well not necessarily big but powerful


EDIT: Meh i guess its a personal opinion thing

MasterTomos

iTrader: (15)

I personally like the fact that there is more variety now than ever.

06RedRocket

Not going to get in a pissing match over it, everyone has there opinion.

Super LaX

It's called "modern" muscle now and that umbrella can cover a lot of cars from the SRT/4 Neon and Cobalt SS up to the 300 SRT/8 and Caddy CTS-V range. Performance is alive and well at the moment but I don't know how much longer this trend will last.... gas prices, CAFE, etc. could be its demise.

Nick V.

iTrader: (1)

i dont really know if its dead. ...its different. i love my SS and cant wait to get a deeper exhuast and do some work to it but, that being said


gimme a 67-69 SS, Z28, ZL1 with the manual trans and id be sporting a chubby right now.

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

It did not take nearly that long. We were in the 11s in 1989. 10 second GNs were commonplace by the early 90s.

I do get tickled by people who talk about how fast their muscle car was or how the GN is one of the baddest cars of all times. They were fast for their ERA, but the reality is that the new V6 Mustang that my niece got for her graduation present would crush a stock Grand National and most of the Muscle cars of the 60s.

Model16

People talk alot of crap about the Cobalt TC/SS's too..they arent much slower then our cars, about .2 or so slow to 60 and about the same slower in the 1/4 officially...and i know they can be made really fast for even cheaper..im sure alot would walk some cars of the past

MasterTomos

iTrader: (15)

If they made a PT Cruiser that was faster than our cars, that doesn't mean I'd like it

Model16

oh not at all im just saying this 4 cylinder hatchback is faster then a lot of V8 cars from the 60s - 70s

TheMonteMan

i think that theres a resurgence in the muscle car/hp wars. if anything its better now than it ever was. the big 3 are all putting out heavy hitter small block cars that can be had for a decent price(if you get a stripper model) most of which would bend over a good portion of the iconic muscle cars of that era, even if they had better tire technology. lets not forget the muscle car era was 64-74 after that emissions, and safety regulations killed performance until technology could catch up. i personally never considered the monte,gp, or regal a muscle car. they were either too big, or under powered. the 70- 77 models were big, and with the gs, chevelle, and gto being the real muscle cars of those brands they were more like the luxury sport coupes of there day. the gbody cars had the right size, and weight if they werent loaded down with options, but super underpowered. the gn was the only exception, and it cost a fortune.