Good to know that an American Muscle Car is the fastest production car ever

http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/fast.htm

Sorry Ferrari :lol:

While that is interesting, the site says this:

"Accurate? Not necessarily.** That largely depends on possibly hundreds of factors that need to be taken into account during testing, including weather, altitude, drivers, traction, etc."

Car magazines and autos tests were notorious for getting 'ringers' that is, factory prepped and modified cars which maximize their performance.

For more than 20 years, the quickest production car that Car& Driver magazine ever tested was a '65 Pontiac Catalina (389 V8), a full size car. It ripped off a 3.9 second 0-60 time. This was faster than any other car, including a bouquet of lighter Hemis, big block Chevy's etc.
It turns out that this car had a 421 V8 fully massaged by Royal Pontiac, a Detroit dealership that had a close performance association with the factory. This car was much much faster than a production Catalina.

I have that test of the Pontiac 2+2. Years later IIRC an ex-C&D employee finally owned up that those impossible figures were rubbish anyway, as in those days magazines were more intent on racing each other in print rather than supplying accurate times

IMO only the naive would categorise a Hemi Dart or Barracuda as being a genuine 'production car'. To put it in perspective a 'stock standard' 1969 ZL1 Camaro with 4.0 gears was capable of high 11s .. but that's an open exhaust with ladder bars & big drag slicks so it's hardly 'standard-production' either is it?

These days you can buy catalogued-model Lotus Clubman clones or similar with race-spec LS1s jammed within. Tiny car, nothing to them. Very light, VERY quick. Do they qualify as a production car?

I would agree that the title of "World's Fastest Accelerating" car goes to the '68 Hemi-Dart and Hemi-Barracuda. (BTW, those cars used the race Hemi rated at 525-550 hp, not 425 like the chart shows.)

I would also say that those Mopars were more of a production car than the Ferrari Enzo. For one thing, they were affordable, the Enzo certainly is not.
Even though the Hemi Dart/Barracuda were limited-production cars, anyone who wanted to buy one only had to walk into the same dealer where Slant-Six Valiants and Plymouth Fury Station Wagons were sold and put in an order. There were something like 50-60 of each (Hemi-Dart/Barracuda) sold. Since they had functional lights and windshield wipers, they could be driven on the street. I've seen a couple at car shows which were driven in off the street.

Anyway, I am glad that Mopar takes the #1 spot! :)
Those two Mopars will probably always be the fastest *affordable* cars. There's really no point having $600,000 cars in a "fastest" list since almost nobody could afford them. And the chance of even seeing one on the street is almost nil.

^ me 2, and I do agree that there are some infractions on that list, but I think over all that the list isn't a bad one at all.

that's all straight line stuff. I want to know how those top cars perform when they have to move the wheel at all. *screech screech spin spin spin *

http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/fast.htm

Sorry Ferrari :lol:

LOL: Yep, perhaps up to that quarter mile marker, and even then the title should be 'quickest' accelerating, not 'fastest'. At some point just north of that 1/4, all the cuda would see would be the Ferrari's ass-end. Or when the first turn came up, perhaps.

LOL: Yep, perhaps up to that quarter mile marker, and even then the title should be 'quickest' accelerating, not 'fastest'. At some point just north of that 1/4, all the cuda would see would be the Ferrari's ass-end. Or when the first turn came up, perhaps.
That would be of little comfort after one of the Mopars just blew away the Ferrari on the 1/4 mile. Since those Super Stock Hemi Mopars were only built for drag-strip racing, it would be out of context to see how they could corner. It would make about as much sense as entering the Ferrari in a fuel economy run.

true, but i think the ferrari would win that one over the mopars too!

true, but i think the ferrari would win that one over the mopars too!
Yeah, like muscle car fans such as I care about mileage!
I guess the Ferrari driver could say, after losing the 1/4 mile race to the Mopar, that his car gets better fuel mileage!

Since the Hemis are tough engines, they probably last a lot longer than the Ferrari engines. (Any engine that can rev to 8,000 rpm is going to be subjected to a lot of stress.)

Yeah, like muscle car fans such as I care about mileage!
I guess the Ferrari driver could say, after losing the 1/4 mile race to the Mopar, that his car gets better fuel mileage!

Since the Hemis are tough engines, they probably last a lot longer than the Ferrari engines. (Any engine that can rev to 8,000 rpm is going to be subjected to a lot of stress.)

But you are basing everything on the quarter mile time/speed, which is not only not the only aspect of a car, not indicative of the fastest (but rather the quickest) and about the only thing the Hemi would have over the Enzo, since after the 1/4 mark, the Hemi had neither the aerodynamics, transmission or structural stability to match the Enzo. After the 1/4 mile time/speed, with no curves whatsoever, the Enzo owns the Hemi, game over, do not pass go, do not collect $200, go directly to pink slip collection of the Ferrari owner.

The Hemi is great for what it was and what it can still do. And, in comparison to the Enzo, that's all it's worth and it's not much.

But you are basing everything on the quarter mile time/speed, which is not only not the only aspect of a car, not indicative of the fastest (but rather the quickest) and about the only thing the Hemi would have over the Enzo, since after the 1/4 mark, the Hemi had neither the aerodynamics, transmission or structural stability to match the Enzo. After the 1/4 mile time/speed, with no curves whatsoever, the Enzo owns the Hemi, game over, do not pass go, do not collect $200, go directly to pink slip collection of the Ferrari owner.

The Hemi is great for what it was and what it can still do. And, in comparison to the Enzo, that's all it's worth and it's not much.
The Hemi Mopars, of course, had beefed up transmissions.

With the Ferrari's ridiculous $652,000 price, who can afford one? Anyone back in the 1960s who could afford a Corvette or Ford Thunderbird could afford an S/S Hemi Mopar. Anyone today who could not afford a car more expensive than a Corvette could certainly not afford a Ferrari Enzo.

Also, those Hemi-Mopars could be modifed (for a LOT less than $652,000) to the point where they could keep up with the Ferrari long after the 1/4 mile.

Anyway, the 1/4 mile was what the S/S Hemi Mopars were built for, and they had the fastest 1/4 mile time of any factory, production, unmodifed (and *affordable*) car ever. That's worth a WHOLE LOT!

The Hemi Mopars, of course, had beefed up transmissions.

With the Ferrari's ridiculous $652,000 price, who can afford one? Anyone back in the 1960s who could afford a Corvette or Ford Thunderbird could afford an S/S Hemi Mopar. Anyone today who could not afford a car more expensive than a Corvette could certainly not afford a Ferrari Enzo.

Also, those Hemi-Mopars could be modifed (for a LOT less than $652,000) to the point where they could keep up with the Ferrari long after the 1/4 mile.

Anyway, the 1/4 mile was what the S/S Hemi Mopars were built for, and they had the fastest 1/4 mile time of any factory, production, unmodifed (and *affordable*) car ever. That's worth a WHOLE LOT!

Yes, but so what? Any "yeah, but's...." have nothing to do with the thread subject and the title. They might give you a cup of coffee and $0.25 for it over in the thread entitled, "Good to know that an American Muscle Car is the fastest, most-affordable production car ever that would have to be modified to do anything other than a 1/4 mile and have a hope in hell to keep up with the Enzo", but trust me, you wouldn't like it over there

while we're on the subject of ridiculous prices, has anyone seen the price of some of the original Hemi cars? A hemi 'cuda drop top makes an Enzo look affordable.

Yes, but so what? Any "yeah, but's...." have nothing to do with the thread subject and the title. They might give you a cup of coffee and $0.25 for it over in the thread entitled, "Good to know that an American Muscle Car is the fastest, most-affordable production car ever that would have to be modified to do anything other than a 1/4 mile and have a hope in hell to keep up with the Enzo", but trust me, you wouldn't like it over there
Okay, if you want a quick conclusion, how about this:
The Super/Stock Hemi Mopars were quicker in the 1/4 mile run than the Ferrari Enzo. Period.

while we're on the subject of ridiculous prices, has anyone seen the price of some of the original Hemi cars? A hemi 'cuda drop top makes an Enzo look affordable.
But they were affordable when new. An Enzo will never be affordable new or old.

Okay, if you want a quick conclusion, how about this:
The Super/Stock Hemi Mopars were quicker in the 1/4 mile run than the Ferrari Enzo. Period.

A quick conclusion? I don't recall asking for one, thanks, but it definitely the only conclusion, since the Enzo owns the Hemi's in every other aspect.

Must be frustrating to show up with a knife to a gunfight.

A quick conclusion? I don't recall asking for one, thanks, but it definitely the only conclusion, since the Enzo owns the Hemi's in every other aspect.

And the Hemis will blow away the Ferraris in a 1/4 mile drag race. And the S/S Hemis running in the modified class are running low 9s and high 8s! (And the modifications cost a lot less than $652,000!) I'd rather take that much money and buy two houses!

And the Hemis will blow away the Ferraris in a 1/4 mile drag race. And the S/S Hemis running in the modified class are running low 9s and high 8s! (And the modifications cost a lot less than $652,000!) I'd rather take that much money and buy two houses!

Yawn.

Again, the title (and apparently the subject) of this thread has nothing to do with price.

If you keep bringing up, "yeah, but...." then anything with any vehicle is possible, as in, "If that Yugo had photon torpedos, it could be from Starfleet Command".

The Hemi's did great in the 1/4, but that's where it stopped.

I'm sure the Ferrari will depreciate some, much like the F40. The old mopars will only get more expensive and less practical. (oh my God, i pulled the practicality card in a Mopar vs. Ferrari debate!)

Yawn.

Again, the title (and apparently the subject) of this thread has nothing to do with price.

If you keep bringing up, "yeah, but...." then anything with any vehicle is possible, as in, "If that Yugo had photon torpedos, it could be from Starfleet Command".

The Hemi's did great in the 1/4, but that's where it stopped.
Well, since they were made just for that (1/4 mile drag races) they did it very well, agreed?
And, no "yeah, but...," the S/S Hemi Mopars were the fastest (1/4 mile acceleration) production-line, factory cars built (yes, even faster than the Enzo).

Well, since they were made just for that (1/4 mile drag races) they did it very well, agreed?
And, no "yeah, but...," the S/S Hemi Mopars were the fastest (1/4 mile acceleration) production-line, factory cars built (yes, even faster than the Enzo).

Of course; no one, myself included, ever argued that they didn't do very well in the 1/4 mile.

As for the "yeah, but's...", they were directed at the rather inane comments in regards to modifying the Hemi's. Once one includes that, the sky's the limit, so it's a pointless activity. As in, "Yeah, but if you attached a Saturn V to the Cuda, it would get into orbit faster!"

Of course; no one, myself included, ever argued that they didn't do very well in the 1/4 mile.

As for the "yeah, but's...", they were directed at the rather inane comments in regards to modifying the Hemi's. Once one includes that, the sky's the limit, so it's a pointless activity. As in, "Yeah, but if you attached a Saturn V to the Cuda, it would get into orbit faster!"
Yes, I see what you mean.
But the modifications were less than you would think. For instance for cars to run in the "Super Stock" class, they were not allowed to have turbo- or superchargers.
If you look at the engine of one of those modifed cars, you will see that the engine looks much closer to stock than highly modified.

If anyone thinks a stock '67 GTO was that fast, I have a bridge to sell them in Guam. Toll bridge, you'll be a millionaire

They all lied about performance. Even my favorite, '70 GS Stage 1. Had slicks to get those numbers. The '70 Stage 1 was hailed as the quickest at one time

Actually, V12 Ferrari engines are quite famous for thier toughness and longevity. They were overengineered to last for 24 hours at 100+ mph;
in street cars, six-figure mileage was not unusual.

My old 1962 250GT 2+2 took 15 quarts of Shell Rotella 40W truck oil in the crankcase. That was the factory recommendation.

In contrast, my hero Richard Petty's 426 Hemis could run 500 miles in three hours. I doubt they would last 24.

And the Hemi had it easier with relatively few gearchanges and amost constant speed on an oval track. The Ferraris had to go from 20 mph corners to almost 200 on a three-mile straight at Le Mans, every lap!

In 1954 Tony Bettenhausen and a team of drivers set a fistful of AAA speed records with a full-sized Chrysler, averaging 118 mph for 24 hours.

In 1952, Chrysler built up four Hemis for the 1953 Indianapolis 500. The 331-cu-in engine was interally modified and fuel-injected by Hilborn to achieve 400 horsepower. The engine was installed into a Kurtis chassic and test-driven 140 miles at Indy at an average speed of 135 mph. It continued to run 900 miles without requiring even a plug change.
Later, Chrysler engineers destroked the 331 to 271-cu-in which reduced net output to 372 hp on methanol. The cars and extra engines were sold to Firestone, who used them in testing tires. Firestone found that not one mechanical failure occurred within the entire season, even at the 140-mph lap speeds.

(Info from Petersen's Complete Book of Plymouth, Dodge, Chrysler, printed 1973)

The Chrysler V-8 engines (especially the Hemi) were VERY capable engines!
A '50s Chrysler Hemi reaching the 100,000 mark was like a walk in the park!

true, but i think the ferrari would win that one over the mopars too!

ok ok lets tie a chain from the back of the hemi cuda' and the ferrari and ill bet you that the cuda will pull the fucking shit out of that ferrari.

(ITS CALLED TORQUE)

While is isn't the fastest production car ever, the new Saleen S7 Twin Turbo can accelerate from 100 to 150 mph in 5.7 seconds.

Saleen S7 and S7R (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=379893)

so i know this is an old thread,
but i would like to put out that, the enzo ferriarie is a nice car, a buetifull car, and one that is fast as mother fin' hell. but the old Hemis where amazing underrated machines. Every dyno test i have ever seen of a 426 hemi, has never been under 600 hp stock. Now as for turning, I not positive, but an old super bird definitly had aero dynamics, and would easily do 150 in the stock car races, and I'm pretty positive that thats pretty kick ass.

Thanks for resurrecting, t/a 6.6! All newer Ferraris, showroom stock, run at least 165 mph and some models exceed 200. Sorry, wing cars couldn't begin to approach these speeds with street Hemis and the original equipment (F70?) tires. And I think Daytonas and Superbirds are cool cars.

Note to magicrat: The Car and Driver test was a Ferrari 2+2 vs a Pontiac 2+2. The Pontiac came with a 421 and Hurst 3-speed standard. That engine WAS massaged within an inch of its life by Milt Schornack of Royal Pontiac, the numbers were unreal.

As far as a 421 for 389 swap, this occurred a year earlier when C/D "compared" a '64 GTO with a Ferrari GTO.

Note to muscle Pontiac fans: Why have journalists and enthusiasts pontificated for decades about the heavy-duty suspension, etc. needed to correct the "imbalance" created when the "big" 389 replaced the "little" 326 in the Le Mans/GTO body? THEY'RE THE SAME ENGINE BLOCK! If anything, the 389 would be lighter because bigger aluminum pistons displaced some cylinder wall iron. And a 455 should be even lighter yet!

Further note to fleet472: I am second to few in my admiration for both the '50's and the '60's Hemis. But Indianapolis, as driven in the '50's, would be much easier on a driveline than Le Mans or Nurburgring. Once your Kurtis roadster was up to speed, you left it in high gear all the way around, never shifting and adjusting your speed with throttle only.

All Mopar freaks: I doubt an average Joe, as opposed to a professsional racer could walk into a dealer and order a new Hemi Dart. Like Ford's Fairlane Thunderbolts, I imagine Chrysler lost at least $1,000 wholesale on each one. The COPO GM cars were much easier to access, if Joe went through a performance dealer.

By 1968, it was illegal to deliver a car with non-DOT approved slicks. And Hemi or not, these cars wouldn't be able to get off the line very promptly on Wide Ovals. A new Z06, hell a standard '07 'Vette, would run away and hide from a Hemi Dart if both wore their stock rubber.

On the other hand, as the owner of a first-generation Sting Ray, I've often thought that magazine comparisons between new 'Vettes and '67 427's should have two sets of numbers for the older car. One on the original 7.75 x 15 nylon bias plies, and one on modern performance radials in an equivalent size mounted on the stock wheels.

I thought this was about muscle cars. The vast majority in the top half of the list are limited production (under 1,500 units) and are either race-specific or exotic sports cars. The first one that could be remottely refered to as "muscle car" on the list is the '64 Ford Thunderbolt, and it wasn't made in large volumes.

I would LOVE to see a '69 Corvette from the factory with a 454 in it. No such animal! '70 was the first year of production of 454. This list is full of HOT cars, but most are not "muscle cars", regardless of how much "muscle" they have...

Ain't the "net" fun?
Jim

i realize i'm coming in late on this discussion, but does anybody else see the humor in the fact that the Veryon needs 1001 horsepower (actually more like 1095 in US units) so it can beat a car that uses technology from 41 years ago by .03 seconds...
i think its funny.

it probably costs more than 4 times what the barracuda cost new too.

the barracuda probably had more like 650-700 horsepower, but even so, the veryon should blow it away.

Thanks for resurrecting, t/a 6.6! All newer Ferraris, showroom stock, run at least 165 mph and some models exceed 200. Sorry, wing cars couldn't begin to approach these speeds with street Hemis and the original equipment (F70?) tires. And I think Daytonas and Superbirds are cool cars.

Bobby Isaac once said, "anyone could go and hit 180 mph out of the showroom floor with the 426-Hemi under the hood."


Further note to fleet472: I am second to few in my admiration for both the '50's and the '60's Hemis. But Indianapolis, as driven in the '50's, would be much easier on a driveline than Le Mans or Nurburgring. Once your Kurtis roadster was up to speed, you left it in high gear all the way around, never shifting and adjusting your speed with throttle only.

But it was being driven under what could be termed "race conditions." Remember, it was being driven at an average speed of 135 mph.

All Mopar freaks: I doubt an average Joe, as opposed to a professsional racer could walk into a dealer and order a new Hemi Dart. Like Ford's Fairlane Thunderbolts, I imagine Chrysler lost at least $1,000 wholesale on each one. The COPO GM cars were much easier to access, if Joe went through a performance dealer.

From what I've read, an average Joe could indeed walk into a dealer and order a Hemi Dart (assuming he had the money, of course). Chrysler didn't encourage a non-race-car driver to buy one.. they were sold without a title, and every buyer had to sign a lengthy disclaimer spelling out the car's compromised comfort and driveability, but if someone really wanted one, they were available.

By 1968, it was illegal to deliver a car with non-DOT approved slicks. And Hemi or not, these cars wouldn't be able to get off the line very promptly on Wide Ovals. A new Z06, hell a standard '07 'Vette, would run away and hide from a Hemi Dart if both wore their stock rubber.

I know of at least one owner of a '68 Hemi Barracuda which is street-driven. I have also seen a minimum of two Hemi Darts at car shows which were not trailered in.