An observation from a newbie

[terzmo]

Because they are wrong when declaring the 64 gto the first muscle car...I just got jumped by a mopar lover who submitted the 55 chrysler 300 as the first muscle car...300 meant...300 h.p. What American car in 55 even came close to that ??? And every year after....Chrysler made the hemis and more HP afterwards. Did the gto become the first musscle car because it had a 4 speed option??? It didn't have a hp per cube.oh..and the 327 had options with HP as high as 375 hP....with weight and HP...aren't we talkin tiger stompin here...

[wedgemotor]

By definition does anyone feel that any car produced after 1974 is a musclecar?

[wedgemotor]

I see your point Terzmo. I think what MrPbody means is what has been accepted as such over time. When the term musclecar was first coined, sometime after the fifties cars that you mention, it had generally been accepting in automotive circles that the GTO was the first packaged musclecar. Yes there were fast cars produced before that time, but that doesn't make it a musclecar. I think I can speak for majority in stating that the Musclecar era ran from 64-74. I to think that over time people have changed the rules and have accepted this car or that car as a musclecar, and even cars of late. IMO I can't see calling an 03 Cobra a musclecar, that is not to say that it isn't a performance car though. It can run circles around any "musclecar". It's just as simple as that, but people want to call there own cars musclecars I guess.

[terzmo]

My opinion is the last good looking chevy was 72...Mustang was decent til 73 then in 74 shrunk to a mutant mustang....challengers and barracuda's lasted til 74..after that, style/performance: shit the Bed. Chargers and satellites went wacky in 71...Just MY opinion. Corvette lost all chrome in 74

[terzmo]

No musle after 71...de-tuned engines...8.5 to 1 compression....non existent cams...smaller carbs...added pollutant crap....

[terzmo]

One of the earlier points made was that an SS could havea 6cyl engine..well, in 64...a GTO was a Tempest/lemans with the GTO option. Same in 65 until they came up with the 242 vin number designating it strickly as a gto. Tempest/Lemans also had 6 bangers. The only way to check on a 64 or early 65 was to see if A5 was on the fenderwall tag...that was the GTO option. The 55 Chrysler 300...had no motor options....per the local mopar guru..Big motor....base car.....done 9 years earlier...

[wedgemotor]

Love those 300's! The early 300 was such an awesome car. It was completely overlooked by many. I really love the 300F convertible with the 413 ram horns, WOW. Collector's are just now starting to realize what these cars were. Did you see that one on Barrett Jackson go for an enormous amount of money? It was good to see in the sea of Tri-5 Chevies that were on the block. Long live the 300, check out the new 300 SRT-8. I think Chrysler should engineer that car as a coupe, and make a convertible. I think they missed the mark by only offering a 4-door version, same with the charger

[RivGSmusclecar]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

No matter how hard you try, you can't change the past. There can only be one "first". Why is it such a big deal to you, that GTO is that one?

I'm not trying to change the past.......the past speaks for itself. I don't take offense just because certain cars are not included in a classification that I really could not care less about being a part of.........what irks me is that people who consider themselves to be such "experts" about what fits the designation really don't know all the facts. All cars form the late 50'5 to the early '70's are a part of me, and when someone starts shooting off their mouth with only some of the facts I'd be a wimp not to speak up.

If you want to bring magazine articles into the discussion, I have read a few that call just about anything on wheels a musclecar if they think it will sell more copies. The fact is, many authors are just writers being paid to do a job and are in the business of selling magazines.......they only print what won't get them fired. Print one that proclaims the most popular cars and you'll sell a bunch. Print one that proclaims the underdogs and you'll go bankrupt. Every now and then an author has been known to go against the grain and print an unpopular opinion, then he learns his lesson and then never does it again.

Regardless of what the opinion may be of some of these authors, and some people, I don't consider the GTO to be the first musclecar........neither do many other people.......that's all there is to it........that's my OPINION and I'm sticking to that. I don't own a magazine company or a website where I can impose my opinions on everyone else, so I have to settle for just stirring the pot once in a while when I'm able to.

There have been many other performance vehicles produced over the years that without having them as competition, the highly coveted GTO would never have been built in the first place. If you're going to base this classification on big engines in light cars, then OK........

..........but to the best of my knowlege Dodge began putting big engines in light cars long before the first GTO was even on the drawing board. No reason to call something a "musclecar" if there was nothing else to start the competition in the first place now is there?

[wedgemotor]

Point taken, by the way I consider your car a musclecar since all Riv GS cars came with hi-po motors. IMO I consider an SS 454 Monte Carlo one too, as well as the Grand Prix SSJ. -I can hear the replies

[RivGSmusclecar]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

my dad always taught me, "5,000 Frenchmen can't be wrong!" That means, if the majority in a given subject, all say the same thing, it's probably true...
The valves for the "nail head" have a very large head on them, resembling a large finishing nail. The valve angle is VERY steep, as pointed out. That led to the funny looking pistons with the big ol' knot on top. As we have learned over the years, the steep valve angle does not lend itself well to high performance flow characteristics. Chevy builders go to great lengths to "roll" the head over to decrease the valve angle (the primary purpose of "angle milling").

Actually, you are wrong again Mr. Pbody........the reason it's called a Nailhead is because the valves have smaller heads in comparison to other engines, not larger ones. The valve angle in relation to the cylinder heads have nothing to do with the shape of the piston in a Nailhead.

The combustion chambers do have a hemispherical design, and the "big 'ol knot" as you call it on the piston top is there to increase the compression, and it is notched to provide clearance between the valve heads and the top of the pistons just as the pistons on other brands are also notched to provide clearance. I don't build race motors, so I won't comment about steep valve angles and flow characteristics.......and a Buick motor is a totally different animal than a chevy.

The valves in my Nailhead are 1-1/2" for the exhaust and 1-7/8" for the intake, not exactly teeny weeny but smaller in comparison to the 430/455 which are 1-5/8" exhaust and 2" intake.......stage 1 heads are even slightly larger than that. The extra 1/8" helps make for a little more power in the 430/455's but the Nailhead still makes more torque at the lower RPM's than the 430/455 can. And the 430/455's do not have forged cranks and rods like the Nailheads do.........I'll run the Nailhead.

And tell your dad 5,000 Frenchman can be wrong, especially when they are ignorant to all of the facts. When Hemmings and all the rest of them start printing objectively and stop printing whatever it takes to sell magazines, perhaps then I will read them.

[MrPbody]

Rivg, was not refering to the diameter. Sorry, I should have been more succinct. I meant the large mass of the valve head. The valve is shaped somewhat like a Hershey's Kiss, with a long stem., not unlike the current titanium valves being used in modern high rev race engines. The chamber is shaped like a bath tub, not a hemi. Believe me, I built many of them, though it's been over 20 years since one has found it's way into my shop. They're getting few and far between out there.
Comparing the 430/455 to the Nailhead is apples-to-donuts. FAR more efficient and just as durable, the later engines are quite good.
As a Pontiac guy, I've been forced to use cast cranks for many years. They are excellent. As with the Pontiac, the weak point in the Buick is NOT the cast crank. The Buick cranks were made by the same methods (nodular iron) as the Pontiacs. And again, as with the Pontiac, the Buick's weak point is the block, itself. The 455 block is one of the lighter blocks out there, displacing such a large amount. The price paid for the weight savings, is the lack of rigidity. 455s are known for wiping cam bearings if overheated. I've seen maybe 20 with this over the years. It may be the material of the bearing, but I think it more the flexing and expansion/contraction issues found with all "thin wall" castings. The upside is, the massive torque the Buick is capable of, while weighing in about the same as a small block Chevy. This can make for a very fun car, that can actually go around some corners. The GSs were very good when equipped with the factory handling package.
Nope, not ignorant here. You name an American V8 engine made between 1950 and 2000, and I've built at least one of them... Hundreds of some!
PAX

[RivGSmusclecar]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

The chamber is shaped like a bath tub, not a hemi.

And again, as with the Pontiac, the Buick's weak point is the block, itself. PAX

Nailheads used the same shape combustion chamber for many years. When I described it as being of hemispherical design, that description comes directly from my factory Buick service manual......I guess the engineers over at GM don't know what they're talking about.

As for Buick blocks being weak, you have the right to voice your opinion......I would never run a 430/455 in mine because of their poorly designed oiling system.... making the oil pump an integral part of the timing cover IMO was a bad idea.....and #7 and #8 rod bearings are the last ones to get the oil. Their tendency toward spun bearings and cracked heads, primarily around the combustion chamber area are enough to keep me away. If you never overheat one and maintain it well they last a long time. And there are aftermarket fixes for those design flaws, but no thanks.

If I was concerned about being the fastest, I'd run the 455.......but I'm more concerned with reliability, so I run the 425 Nailhead. ...........the Nailhead was one of the most durable engines ever made, and as any Nailhead racer/builder will tell you that block is very well designed and far from being weak. There's a lot more to a motor than the size of the valves.

Incidently, the reason the valves in a Nailhead are sticking up 90 degress vertical is because in order for them to fit in place of the straight 8 they had to be narrow......there was no way to do that without designing it that way.

[RivGSmusclecar]

Oh and I forgot.......for those who say a Nailhead can't run?........back in the late 50's Buick engineers at the Buick proving grounds in Flint experimented with a supercharged Nailhead. I can find the article if I need to........it produced over 700 HP, I forgot the torque.

Buicks foremost concern with their product was reliability, so they ran it wide open on the dyno for a couple days straight until it blew up.......that was the only Nailhead crank I ever saw that was broken in half. Needless to say the idiots scrapped the idea.......like the consumer would drive that fast for days in a row I just wonder what the "experts" opinion would be about who made the first musclecar had this motor made it into production?

[MrPbody]

After repairing a number of 3.8s due to the oiling system, I would have to agree about the oil pump in the timing cover. The late model 3800s have a crescent pump driven off the crank, making the 3800 one of the best engines in a modern car. I like the newer head designs, too.
We could banter all week, about what factory engineers tried and didn't produce. I knew a man with a '49 Merc with a Jensen blower on it from the factory. He was an instructor at AAI in the early '70s.
The cover of Hot Rod, March,, 1970, showed the most powerful engine of the era, that GM never produced. 427 CID Pontiac, OHC with true hemispherical chambers. Too bad. Could have kept GM in the Top Fuel hunt for a few more years...
I never read the factory description for the nailhead. I only saw the engines. The chamber is definitely not a hemi. It is, however, fully machined. This is a good thing, keeping chamber volume very accurate and the surface finish allows for better flame propegation. Pontiac was the only other GM division to do this. The '55-'67 Pontiac chambers are remarkably similar to the nailhead. The valve angle is the big difference between them. Interesting comment about the design rationale for the valve angle. The same kind of "requirement" made the Pontiac exhaust port so poorly implemented.

[RivGSmusclecar]

Originally Posted by MrPbody

After repairing a number of 3.8s due to the oiling system, I would have to agree about the oil pump in the timing cover. .

Hey, at least we agree on one thing