would u consider this a muscle car?

[ZZII]

Well? would ya?

[rav440]

NO .

[ZZII]

Why not?

[Layla's Keeper]

An old Ken & Mary 4door Skyline? Nope, not a muscle car.

Now, the Ken & Mary generation GTR Skyline, with that 250-300bhp (the factory never was too clear as to which end of that scale the S20 six was at) engine and fiberglass hood. That could be a different story.

[bigbob]

its a muscle car in my book just not an american one...skylines stright dominat the track

[mikegee]

i would say its not a muscle car is a v8 of any sort with more then 300 ci but only 250 and up horses having only the ability to run a strait line but still be out ran by a japanese 4 cylinder.

[Tomsriv]

Muscle cars have torque. You can't get that from a 4 cyl. Even if you have forced induction the power band will not be the same. A lot of lesser muscle cars only ran in the 15s, but they could smoke the tires a lot better than any modern 15 second car. I don't think that ugly pos is a muscle car just because it is fast, it is a completely different breed of car. That thing makes the 61 Plymouths look good.

[mikegee]

Originally Posted by Tomsriv

Muscle cars have torque. You can't get that from a 4 cyl. Even if you have forced induction the power band will not be the same. A lot of lesser muscle cars only ran in the 15s, but they could smoke the tires a lot better than any modern 15 second car. I don't think that ugly pos is a muscle car just because it is fast, it is a completely different breed of car. That thing makes the 61 Plymouths look good.

Tire smoking ok whatever wont even comment on that. a 4 cylinder not producing torque, im not even going to comment on that either. but i will say this, what is the point of all that torque when you arnt going anywhere, when you are being out ran by a 4 cylinder with half the torque.

dodge srt-4 2.4 liters 250 lbs foot of torque spinning the front wheels. if tires smoking impresses you then this car will impress.

[mikegee]

I think its a great looking car. but japanese cars appeal to me even old school.

[Tomsriv]

[quote=mikegee] what is the point of all that torque when you arnt going anywhere, when you are being out ran by a 4 cylinder with half the torque. QUOTE]

Because its a lot more fun to drive a car with an engine that responds the instant you step on the pedal not when the engine reaches its power band. I've driven both types of cars and they are both fun, but I prefer the muscle car. No need to get bent out of shape. Besides with a little suspension work a 15 sec muscle car will be a 14 second car. Muscle cars were built to be affordable. Try getting a WRX up to STI hp without changing the motor or a bunch of parts. I would rather have a great engine and an ok suspension than vice versa. Its a lot easier to upgrade the suspension and brakes than the motor.

Dollar for dollar the V8 car is always the better drag strip performer.

And the SRT-4 gimme a break, as long as its FWD its just a sheep in wolfs clothing.

[mikegee]

[quote=Tomsriv]

Originally Posted by mikegee

what is the point of all that torque when you arnt going anywhere, when you are being out ran by a 4 cylinder with half the torque. QUOTE]

Because its a lot more fun to drive a car with an engine that responds the instant you step on the pedal not when the engine reaches its power band. I've driven both types of cars and they are both fun, but I prefer the muscle car. No need to get bent out of shape. Besides with a little suspension work a 15 sec muscle car will be a 14 second car. Muscle cars were built to be affordable. Try getting a WRX up to STI hp without changing the motor or a bunch of parts. I would rather have a great engine and an ok suspension than vice versa. Its a lot easier to upgrade the suspension and brakes than the motor.

Dollar for dollar the V8 car is always the better drag strip performer.

And the SRT-4 gimme a break, as long as its FWD its just a sheep in wolfs clothing.

call it what ya want, you like what ya like, and i like what i like. id rather have the awsome suspension of the mazda speed protege' with 130 to the front wheels. as for draging dont like it. i perfer drifting and autocross oh and even rally. muscle cars affordable, the only affordable ones are the crappy one like the mustang gt which losses a load of hp through its drivetrain.

[mikegee]

[quote=Tomsriv]

Originally Posted by mikegee

what is the point of all that torque when you arnt going anywhere, when you are being out ran by a 4 cylinder with half the torque. QUOTE]

Because its a lot more fun to drive a car with an engine that responds the instant you step on the pedal not when the engine reaches its power band. I've driven both types of cars and they are both fun, but I prefer the muscle car. No need to get bent out of shape. Besides with a little suspension work a 15 sec muscle car will be a 14 second car. Muscle cars were built to be affordable. Try getting a WRX up to STI hp without changing the motor or a bunch of parts. I would rather have a great engine and an ok suspension than vice versa. Its a lot easier to upgrade the suspension and brakes than the motor.

Dollar for dollar the V8 car is always the better drag strip performer.

And the SRT-4 gimme a break, as long as its FWD its just a sheep in wolfs clothing.

then i guess you dont even know that fwd dragsters has made it into the 7s and a 6 cylinder toyota has made it into the 6s.

[mikegee]

[quote=Tomsriv]

Originally Posted by mikegee

what is the point of all that torque when you arnt going anywhere, when you are being out ran by a 4 cylinder with half the torque. QUOTE]

Because its a lot more fun to drive a car with an engine that responds the instant you step on the pedal not when the engine reaches its power band. I've driven both types of cars and they are both fun, but I prefer the muscle car. No need to get bent out of shape. Besides with a little suspension work a 15 sec muscle car will be a 14 second car. Muscle cars were built to be affordable. Try getting a WRX up to STI hp without changing the motor or a bunch of parts. I would rather have a great engine and an ok suspension than vice versa. Its a lot easier to upgrade the suspension and brakes than the motor.

Dollar for dollar the V8 car is always the better drag strip performer.

And the SRT-4 gimme a break, as long as its FWD its just a sheep in wolfs clothing.

my front wheel drive stock 4 cylinder will run a high 15 right after an oil change.

[Volvord 784VC]

Gentlemen, I don't think any of us are discounting the potential speed or track times of any car no matter how many cylinders the engine has, a 4 cylinder can be very fast where as a V8 can be gutless. But to remain on topic this website has a very good definition that is commonly used and accepted by most.

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...finition.shtml

[Tomsriv]

Originally Posted by Volvord 784VC

Gentlemen, I don't think any of us are discounting the potential speed or track times of any car no matter how many cylinders the engine has, a 4 cylinder can be very fast where as a V8 can be gutless. But to remain on topic this website has a very good definition that is commonly used and accepted by most.

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...finition.shtml

I've seen that site before. I don't really agree with a non SS Chevelle not being one just because it came from the factory with a different motor and suspension. They were all built with the same parts so its pretty easy to turn a non-SS into an SS as far as equipment goes. In my mind if a chevelle goes as fast as an SS it is a muscle car. Just don't try to sell it as a real SS.