Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online!
Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! 
-
Latest | 0 Rplys
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical
Engineering/Technical Ask technical questions about cars. Do you know how a car engine works?
View Poll Results: Who makes the best Muscle Cars???
Chevrolet 11 78.57%
Ford 3 21.43%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Email this Page Email this Page | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-26-2009, 01:24 PM   #91
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

the 2010 Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger can't be compared.
If you take the top model of each and compare them (the Shelby and SRT, not the top model camaro and 2nd model mustang and Challenger) then the Camaro isn't even close.

but then again those arn't really muscle cars.

and I agree in the fact that the old Camaro looked pretty frekin sick, but lets just take a look at the 1967 Mustang shelby for a second,


But why isn't Dodge even an option here?

Top 3 brands as far as Muscle cars
1) Ford
2) Dodge
3) Chevy
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2009, 11:00 PM   #92
knightjp
AF Regular
Thread starter
 
knightjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dubai
Posts: 312
Thanks: 35
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

The 60s Mustangs looked cool. They were better looking than most of the cars out there. My question is if the Camaro and Mustang aren't muscle cars, what out of the Chevy, Ford & Dodge lines were considered as muscle cars?

Between the 2010 Mustang, Camaro and Challenger, which overall comes out ahead? I'm talking about handling, power, style, etc....
knightjp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2009, 11:15 PM   #93
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by knightjp View Post
The 60s Mustangs looked cool. They were better looking than most of the cars out there. My question is if the Camaro and Mustang aren't muscle cars, what out of the Chevy, Ford & Dodge lines were considered as muscle cars?

Between the 2010 Mustang, Camaro and Challenger, which overall comes out ahead? I'm talking about handling, power, style, etc....

No modern attempt at a muscle car is a true muscle car, never will be

and out of the 2010's, Dodge has the 6.1l hemi in the 2010 and in my opinion looks way better, so god Dodge the Camaro looks really nice though, and I'm not a fan of the Mustang being so rounded off
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2009, 08:56 AM   #94
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

knightip,

The definition of "muscle car" is in a few places in this thread, but for "recap":

Muscle car: Intermediate sedan/coupe, 2-door, using engine components from a "full size" car. 1964 GTO is considered the "first" muscle car, a Tempest coupe with a Catalina/Bonneville 389 CID engine.

Chevy's entry is the Chevelle SS396 or SS454. The '72 "SS" (350 CID) can't be considered, as it has a small block engine, nor can the 6-cylinder powered SS models before 396.

Ford's entries include the Fairlane GT or GT/A and Torino GT and "Cobra" models with 390 or larger engines. A '67 Fairlane GT w/289 is not considered. Mercury Cyclone GT is also, as long as it has at least the 390 "GT" engine.

Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Baracuda, Challenger, Javelin are all "pony cars", regardless of how much "muscle" they "pack".

Shpuker,

The '04-'6 GTO DID "qualify" under the definition. Since it had American power train components and was marketed only in "left-hand drive" configuration, it could fall into a "gray" area. It also exceeded ALL performance levels previously "held" by GTO from the '69 and '70 models ("peak" performance years). It CAN be considered a true "modern muscle car". The Charger, Magnum and 300 can't as they have 4 doors. For the same reason, G8-GXP can't be considered, either, though it is clearly the performance "leader" of American sedans. I know of no Ford offerings that are in the same class.

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2009, 01:00 PM   #95
knightjp
AF Regular
Thread starter
 
knightjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dubai
Posts: 312
Thanks: 35
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Thanks Jim for clearing that up. I was under the wrong impression all this time.
However the bit of history of the GTO being the first muscle car, I knew that already. I wonder why GM couldn't bring back the GTO the way they did with the Camaro.
I know they did do a GTO, which was nothing more than a re-badged Holden.
knightjp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2009, 01:33 PM   #96
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

GM has "given up" on Pontiac altogether. IMO, it's a mistake, but my opinion doesn't mean anything to them...

The '04-'06 GTO was FAR more than a "rebadged Holden". ALL were "left-hand drive", and none of the Holdens were. All had either LS-1 or LS-2 for an engine. Holden didn't use anything that "large". The cars were assembled in Australia and shipped to Detroit where the drive trains were installed. Many of our Aussie "Pontiac bretheran" lamented they couldn't buy GTO there. Manaro was a good car, but not even a "shadow" of GTO as far as performance is concerned. It's a fact, the "modern" GTO outperformed all previous GTOs, including the Ram Air cars.

GM COULD build another, but with Pontiac gone, what would they "call" it? Cant' be a Chevy, that's for sure... GTO is the biggest "anti-Chevy" there ever was!

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2009, 02:52 PM   #97
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

It's not that the new 'muscle cars' arn't (by defenition) muscle cars. its just that they don't have the same muscle car 'awsomeness', with lack of a real word. Their still sweet but its just not the same
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2009, 09:45 PM   #98
knightjp
AF Regular
Thread starter
 
knightjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dubai
Posts: 312
Thanks: 35
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody View Post
GM has "given up" on Pontiac altogether. IMO, it's a mistake, but my opinion doesn't mean anything to them...

The '04-'06 GTO was FAR more than a "rebadged Holden". ALL were "left-hand drive", and none of the Holdens were. All had either LS-1 or LS-2 for an engine. Holden didn't use anything that "large". The cars were assembled in Australia and shipped to Detroit where the drive trains were installed. Many of our Aussie "Pontiac bretheran" lamented they couldn't buy GTO there. Manaro was a good car, but not even a "shadow" of GTO as far as performance is concerned. It's a fact, the "modern" GTO outperformed all previous GTOs, including the Ram Air cars.

GM COULD build another, but with Pontiac gone, what would they "call" it? Cant' be a Chevy, that's for sure... GTO is the biggest "anti-Chevy" there ever was!

Jim
I'd say you're wrong about the Monaro not having an LS-1 or LS-2 engine. It was sold here as a Chevrolet Lumina Coupe and there were two versions to choose from. There was the V6 engine and the "SS" which had the LS engines.
But on every other front, I'd say you're right.
knightjp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:41 PM   #99
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

If it was sold as a Chevy, it's not a Manaro, then, right? Argh! Argh! Humor...

SHPuker,

You should be at Norwalk for the TriPower Nationals. I missed this year, but in '08 there were no less than 50 "new" GTOs. The slowest was a 14.0 with a 300 lb. man driving it. The quickest was 7.19 @ 198 MPH (turbo/alcohol LS-1). They (modern GTO) sound GREAT with good exhaust or open headers. They have every bit as much pnash and "go" as any older muscle car. The part I like the best is the same thing that "hooked" GTO guys back in the day. GTO people don't really care NEAR as much about what other people see when they look at it, as they care about what THEY see. What GTO guys LIKE is the view THEY get, the dash, the instruments, the view over the hood, etc. GTO isn't a "Hey! Look at me!" car, it's a "Hey! Like my tail lights?" kinda car.

On this site in '04 when first introduced, a Mustang guy said the car had the ugliest tail lights and exhaust tips he'd ever seen. I said "Nice to know after 35 years, some things never change. Like the view Mustang owners get of GTO!" He never came back...(:-

It's all in fun, guys. I DO like GTO over any other muscle car, but I have good reasons aside from "brand loyalty". My GTO (in the early '70s) beat nearly every car I ever raced. Only a handful of BBC-powered Chevelles got me, and only one of them was a 396 (375 HP with "goodies"). No 383-Dodge ANYTHING or 6-Pack ANYTHING ever beat it. A 440 Magnum in a '69 GTX embarrassed the hell out of me one night... No 428 Ford ANYTHING ever beat it, either. A good friend had a '70 Cyclone GT, 429SCJ, 4-speed, 3.50 gear. I could beat him through 1/4 of a mile plus about 10 feet. He would hit 4th and was GONE! Took money from so many small block powered cars, word got around fairly quickly not to "mess with that yellow Judge!" Not too much later, I got a '65 w/TriPower. A little "warming up" of that one and I was driving an honest 12 second car. In those days, a 12 second car was like a 10 second car today. San Bernardino HATED my Pontiacs... (:-

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 02:20 PM   #100
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

I understand that Modern cars make more power, better fuel mileage and all that jazz but its just not the same never will be.

I mean how con you compare


And
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 01:05 PM   #101
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

I understand your point. It's a different world we live in today. I embrace new stuff, and can still love the old stuff... I wasn't at all disappointed when GTO WAS NOT "retro" like those whore-mobiles, Mustang and Challenger. IMO, "retro" is nothing BUT "whoring on past glory". At least Pontiac had enough class to NOT "lean" on the old Goats, AND they limited production as to not "goop it up" with volumes that let you see yourself every time you turn a corner...(:- No "economy" versions, either! (V6 Challenger, non-blown Mustang).

Wouldn't a '65 be a better example? (just teasin'!)

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 04:40 PM   #102
MagicRat
Nothing scares me anymore
 
MagicRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: City of Light
Posts: 10,702
Thanks: 12
Thanked 82 Times in 77 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody View Post
"retro" is nothing BUT "whoring on past glory".

no no no NO!

The retro-look is great! It's a great compliment to the age when cars could look like spaceships because they were unencumbered with government-mandated bumpers and the aerodynamic necessities required to get good gas mileage.

The retro look is a welcome change to all the look-alike cars we have seen in the past 20 years. These days, I cannot tell a Camry from Mazda, and heven help me tell you what year that Accord is.

But I can spot a retro T-bird or the new Camaro from about 12 blocks away

I'm teasing here but imho, 'whoring' a car is done by plastering it with fake scoops and 'screaming chicken' decals... and Pontiac has done plenty of that!

I know, as I have a GTO and used to own a T/A.
MagicRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 12:24 AM   #103
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody View Post
I understand your point. It's a different world we live in today. I embrace new stuff, and can still love the old stuff... I wasn't at all disappointed when GTO WAS NOT "retro" like those whore-mobiles, Mustang and Challenger. IMO, "retro" is nothing BUT "whoring on past glory". At least Pontiac had enough class to NOT "lean" on the old Goats, AND they limited production as to not "goop it up" with volumes that let you see yourself every time you turn a corner...(:- No "economy" versions, either! (V6 Challenger, non-blown Mustang).

Wouldn't a '65 be a better example? (just teasin'!)

Jim
since when are muscle cars about fuel mileage? If it gets 20mpg great. But if it can't spin the tires in reverse. It's not a muscle car. And the new gto is a sedan with a big engine nothing more. There's nothing impresive about it
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 02:00 PM   #104
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

I qualified my last couple of posts as opinions. This IS, afterall, STRICTLY a matter of opinion as far as what cars one likes or dislikes. The "real" ('64) GTO was a two door sedan with a big engine in it, nothing more. The entire world was pretty impressed...

I know people that believe Hondas are the nastiest cars in the world. I know people that honestly believe a B18A can "run" with a hemi (REAL Hemi, not that modern POS, which, BTW, does NOT have hemispherical combustion chambers, making it a "Hemi" in NAME ONLY). I even know a guy that collects Yugos... Its okay for you to have your opinions, as well as it is me.

Having the guts to "field" a "real one" impresses me a WHOLE LOT more than pandering to the the general public. I realize, that's where the money is and that's who buys most of the cars. Even MORE reason to like GTO. NOT "mainstream", aimed at a specific group and hitting the target (BULLSEYE!). Whether or not you are impressed, like it, or anything else regarding it, GTO is still "king of the hill" in its class. Without a blower, there is no Mustang or Challenger that can touch it. Can we put a blower on GTO? Can we? Please..? Awe... come on....

I DO enjoy bantering over these kind of subjects, but I sense you're starting to take it more seriously than I intend it, so I will make this my last entry in the thread. Suffice it say we agree to disagree over GTO. Been there, done that. Pontiac has, since about 1970, been the "Rodney Dangerfield" of high performance cars. But of course, the 2nd gen T/A is almost as "legendary" as GTO. And let's not forget the infamous '77 Z/28 with its hood "scoop" STICKER.

PAX

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 04:42 PM   #105
Shpuker
AF Enthusiast
 
Shpuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Posts: 778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Yay banter

C'mon lol. I like that they started making new cars that look like the old muscle cars I just don't like how they tryed to call them muscle cars again. Their sports cars . nothing else. and the newer modle GTO's don't even look classic. their a great sports car. Not a muscle car though
__________________

Quote:
Your quote here!!!
Shpuker is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD

Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:47 PM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts