Muscle car?

i was wondering what was the first muscle car that was produced.

As I recall, the Pontiac GTO is considered the first muscle car.

Not only was it the first, it also set a lot of standards to be a muscle car.

The '64 Pontiac GTO was the first complete factory built muscle car.

GTO is a nice car, friend has a 72.

Yup, no doubt. '64 GTO is the "God Father". 442 wasn't far behind, as far as introduction, but WAY behind in performance.

GTO was the first, but the Trans Am was the best.

Mind you, though, there are several cars that have been also considered parts of the Muscle Car Revolution that predated the GTO.

Take into consideration the Studebaker Lark R1's (the infamous Paxton blown Studies), the Packard Hawk, the Chrysler 300-A, the 1955-57 Chevy Bel Air, the 1961 Chevy Impala SS 409, and the fact that the Plymouth Barracuda was introduced before either the GTO or the Mustang and you'll see that the muscle car had been happening for a bit longer than just 1964 - 1973.

Still, GTO gave the cars prominence in the era and started the push towards radical performance and hotted up styling.

It's much like how the Cobra wasn't the first big Yankee V8 into small Brit chassis swap produced - that distinction goes to Allard - but is more widely known. The cars before the GTO didn't cause much of a stir because of their muscle or weren't as widely available.

GTO was the first, but the Trans Am was the best.
A Trans Am is a pony car.

in my opinion the first muscle car was the 68 road runner it was considered the first big engine no option car for the average guy to own. although the gto had a big engine it not everyone could afford it. it all really depends on your definition of a muscle car.

And big-block Chevelles (just to name one example) were not muscle cars!??

Some of you guys are either kids, or very childlike, with your need to identify with and promote certain brands!

A Chevelle would be. Take like a '67 with a 396, that's a big car with a big motor. I call that a muscle car.

However, the first big block Chevelles were ultra rare option code cars much like the later COPO cars. The 1965 Z-16 Chevelles number merely in the hundreds.

Inexpensive muscle came about because the original muscle cars got pricey fast. By the time GTX, Charger, and Coronet R/T showed up in 1966/67, they were upmarket luxury muscle. The GTO was also growing more gentlemanly (it always carried the air of being the mature muscle car) and Chevelle had yet to earn a name for itself. The Ford Fairlane was mostly ignored, and the Mercury Comet even more so.

Well, I have to disagree. True the Fairlane and Comet were ignored, but the Chevelle never had to earn a name for itself. I was in high school at the time and a couple of guys owned big block Chevelles, 66 or 67s, I can't remember. I do remember that those were the cars we all lusted after, more than any other. They had the splayed-valve head "mystery motors", and were considered the meanest cars in our high school! Big block Chevelles had everyones attention and respect immediately!

Oh, and as for GTOs -- well everyone liked them, but they were never considered a match for the big block Chevelles. As you mentioned they were seen as somewhat less rowdy and more upscale.

The first manual transmissoned car I ever drove was my big sister's '66 SS396 (Chevelle). DEFINITELY a muscle car. But our neighbor had a '66 TriPower GTO. That Chevelle never knew what hit it! For the most part, it took a 375 horse 396 (rectangular port) to run with the better GTOs. A 350 horse 396 was no match for a 350 horse 400 in a '67 GTO.
The earlier full-size cars that ran very well, were not considered muscle cars, but factory high performance cars. Muscle still hinges on the intermediate body. And while the 409 Chevys were popular, along with the 413 Dodges and 406 Fords, none could compete with the '62 and '63 Catalinas. Total domination of both NASCAR and NHRA in '62 and into '63 is where Pontiac has staked its racing roots. No single manufacturer has ever dominated more, both series for a full season, before or since.
The '64 barracudas had 170 and 225 CID engines. Hardly muscular. Even the cute little 273, though a good performer for it's size, could not make the power to qualify it as "muscle". It took the '66 version with the Hemi or the 383 to make real muscle. And was STILL a pony car, not a muscle car. That's almost like saying the '65 Mustang was a muscle car. NOT! We were knee-deep in those little Falcons-in-drag, and not one ever came close to running with The Judge... (my first GTO) Not unlike the situation today, with all the hoopla around a performance car with a blower, being as fast as a dinasaur-like pushrod engine (LS1/6). Can we put a blower on the GTO?
Why are we trying to redefine something firmly established 40 years ago?