SuperStockAndy Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Andy, i know you are a young kid with a lot to learn still, i just hope you move into the future with a much more open mind. you don't have to like imports but to hate on them for just the reason that they are is ignorant. you never know, you may find yourself behind the wheel of one in the future and actually really enjoy it and like it. I don't like them because I don't just not like them. I don't like them because I do prefer V8 engines, which it seems most of the imports don't come with. And, I also don't like supercars a whole lot either. I've driven a few cars, import AND domestic, and I just have more fun driving domestic cars.
whale392 Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Don't waste your time, Dave. Once the veil of overshadowed/oppressed/mental stunting is lifted, words of wisdom will be acknowledged. Until then, there is only one line of thought, and that is of the uninitiated and powered by father-figured sway. I was similar at the same time frame. Luckily, I relinquished my youthful foolhardiness for truth.
SuperStockAndy Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 (edited) Don't waste your time, Dave. Once the veil of overshadowed/oppressed/mental stunting is lifted, words of wisdom will be acknowledged. Until then, there is only one line of thought, and that is of the uninitiated and powered by father-figured sway. I was similar at the same time frame. Luckily, I relinquished my youthful foolhardiness for truth. Ah, well even though I supposedly "know it all", I can't figure out what you're saying. Makes no sense. Edited January 1, 2012 by Andy C.
Tonioseven Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Ah, well even though I supposedly "know it all", I can't figure out what you're saying. Makes no sense. You just unknowingly proved his point.
SuperStockAndy Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 (edited) You just unknowingly proved his point. Hmm..... Edited January 1, 2012 by Andy C.
moparmagiclives Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) most modern "muscle" easily weighs just as much as if not more than many old school musclecars did. again, technology has come a long way and the tire and traction problems of the 60's and 70's arent much of an issue today. we now have drag radials that are stickier than the full on drag slicks were then. however, if you look into the pure stock drags you will note that these guys are not running drag slicks, but period correct reproduction bias-plies and running incredibly fast 1/4 mile times on them. the pure stock drags take "tuning" to a level you can't imagine and that's what is amazing about it. i love old school muscle and old cars for that matter, but i don't even try to pretend they are something they never were. And here is an example... The new challenger R/T with the 5.7L is making around 370hp, a little less then the 440s back in the day if I remeber reading correctly, they come off the scales at around 4200#s...thats about 700 MORE then the good ol' cars of the muscle era...and are clicking ETs at the mid 13s. (with all that "smog" stuff even ) almost a second less then "most" muscle cars of the 60s and 70s..I say most because the ones that were faster then that were not sitting on every corner like these things are,or box stock. Lets not even mention the SRT8 group, or the new mustangs.... Edited January 2, 2012 by moparmagiclives
Maindrian Pace Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 The new cars make a good deal more HP than the old muscle cars did, because HP is figured in net terms now, and was rated in gross terms back in the day. New standard Mustang and Camaro V8s are in the 12s now, and nothing in the '60s ran that fast except 427 Cobras and some 427 Corvettes. The big three are offering cars with 600+ net HP, we are in the fastest muscle era ever right now. -MJS
Junkman Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) The new cars make a good deal more HP than the old muscle cars did, because HP is figured in net terms now, and was rated in gross terms back in the day. New standard Mustang and Camaro V8s are in the 12s now, and nothing in the '60s ran that fast except 427 Cobras and some 427 Corvettes. The big three are offering cars with 600+ net HP, we are in the fastest muscle era ever right now. -MJS True. The Germans build close to 600 DIN PS family estates nowadays. Not sure what they do on the quarter mile, but should there be a bend at the end of the straight, they do go around it, too. Edited January 2, 2012 by Junkman
moparmagiclives Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 600 DIN, thats like only what..... 591 SAE HP...sheesh And they call those fast... :lol:
Rob McKee Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I don't like them because I don't just not like them. I don't like them because I do prefer V8 engines, which it seems most of the imports don't come with. And, I also don't like supercars a whole lot either. I've driven a few cars, import AND domestic, and I just have more fun driving domestic cars. I to prefer to drive an American car with a V8. As a matter of fact I have never owned anything import in my life. I know that doesn't put me into a position to judge import vehicles with 4 bangers and I am not trying to do so. This is just my preference and I think Andy is trying to say the same thing. I have a good friend of mine who owns a Mazda CX and I have seen him clean the clock of a GT Mustang. It doesn't mean I am going to go buy one though. Rob
moparmagiclives Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 The new cars make a good deal more HP than the old muscle cars did, because HP is figured in net terms now, and was rated in gross terms back in the day. -MJS How does that make them "make" more power ??
SuperStockAndy Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 How does that make them "make" more power ?? They don't make more power, it's just all the power lost through drivetrain.
ChrisPflug Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) Many of the horsepower ratings from "the good old days" were a bit optimistic as well- a few exceptions, but the "mid range" muscle options really weren't much Many muscle engines of the 60s made less power than a healthy modern V6 Edited January 2, 2012 by ChrisPflug
Maindrian Pace Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 How does that make them "make" more power ?? It was actually two statements, not carefully separated because this isn't a technical bulletin. But the two ideas here are that: 1) New performance V8s make more HP than old ones, with fewer cubic inches, full pollution controls, and full accessories including A/C, and they do it while getting far better fuel economy, running much cleaner, and 2) Pre-'72 engines were rated in gross, or brake HP, while new engines are rated in net HP. The difference is that gross HP was measured with the engine on a test dyno, often with headers instead of manifolds, non-restrictive air cleaner, and usually one fan belt driving only an alternator, no fan. Modern net HP figures test an engine in a car, with full accessories as it is usually sold, stock air intake, exhaust, and other restrictive equipment in place. So this can make a 50 HP difference on a performance V8, and you can apply this rough estimate to any older engine. A '64 Ford 427 was rated at 425 HP in the old system, it would probably be closer to 375 HP if measured today. Meanwhile, a new Mustang 5.0 Boss engine makes 444 HP net, so if tested by old standards, it would be closer to 500 HP. More HP and similar torque with 125 fewer CI's, and that's the genesis of the statement that modern engines make more HP than old ones. Often way more. -MJS
Junkman Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 It was actually two statements, not carefully separated because this isn't a technical bulletin. But the two ideas here are that: 1) New performance V8s make more HP than old ones, with fewer cubic inches, full pollution controls, and full accessories including A/C, and they do it while getting far better fuel economy, running much cleaner, and 2) Pre-'72 engines were rated in gross, or brake HP, while new engines are rated in net HP. The difference is that gross HP was measured with the engine on a test dyno, often with headers instead of manifolds, non-restrictive air cleaner, and usually one fan belt driving only an alternator, no fan. Modern net HP figures test an engine in a car, with full accessories as it is usually sold, stock air intake, exhaust, and other restrictive equipment in place. So this can make a 50 HP difference on a performance V8, and you can apply this rough estimate to any older engine. A '64 Ford 427 was rated at 425 HP in the old system, it would probably be closer to 375 HP if measured today. Meanwhile, a new Mustang 5.0 Boss engine makes 444 HP net, so if tested by old standards, it would be closer to 500 HP. More HP and similar torque with 125 fewer CI's, and that's the genesis of the statement that modern engines make more HP than old ones. Often way more. -MJS Yeah, but they still can't catch up with a yellow '73 Mustang, right, Toby?
Maindrian Pace Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Yeah, but they still can't catch up with a yellow '73 Mustang, right, Toby? I really should have read my horoscope that morning. -MJS
moparmagiclives Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 It was actually two statements, not carefully separated because this isn't a technical bulletin. But the two ideas here are that: 1) New performance V8s make more HP than old ones, with fewer cubic inches, full pollution controls, and full accessories including A/C, and they do it while getting far better fuel economy, running much cleaner, and 2) Pre-'72 engines were rated in gross, or brake HP, while new engines are rated in net HP. The difference is that gross HP was measured with the engine on a test dyno, often with headers instead of manifolds, non-restrictive air cleaner, and usually one fan belt driving only an alternator, no fan. Modern net HP figures test an engine in a car, with full accessories as it is usually sold, stock air intake, exhaust, and other restrictive equipment in place. So this can make a 50 HP difference on a performance V8, and you can apply this rough estimate to any older engine. A '64 Ford 427 was rated at 425 HP in the old system, it would probably be closer to 375 HP if measured today. Meanwhile, a new Mustang 5.0 Boss engine makes 444 HP net, so if tested by old standards, it would be closer to 500 HP. More HP and similar torque with 125 fewer CI's, and that's the genesis of the statement that modern engines make more HP than old ones. Often way more. -MJS Not to be a pain Mike, but gross HP was theoretical measurment made of an engine assembly, 1972 the SAE set the standards for Net and brake HP, that are both measured at the crank shaft. But enough of that, Technology has come so far in the power race, its nutts !!! I really should have read my horoscope that morning. -MJS I smell a good story in there somewhere ....
Maindrian Pace Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Not to be a pain Mike, but gross HP was theoretical measurment made of an engine assembly, 1972 the SAE set the standards for Net and brake HP, that are both measured at the crank shaft. But enough of that, Technology has come so far in the power race, its nutts !!! I forgot that part, net tests the engine as installed in a car, with all power robbing accessories in place, but not actually in the car, and yes, power is measured at the crank and not the wheels. There are pages and pages of control spec on manufacturer testing of an engine, it's quite complicated to comply with the standard. -MJS
SuperStockAndy Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Yeah, but they still can't catch up with a yellow '73 Mustang, right, Toby? If it would've been made BEFORE 1972, then yes
wgflatliner Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Suffice it to say that performance has improved via efficiency as opposed to bigger displacement over time? My thought process is relatively simple. There is a car out there for every automotive enthusiast. Whether it be domestic or import, if you throw enough money (or transmissions in some cases) at a car, you can make it fast.
moparmagiclives Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I learned my leason on HP when I was in UTI and running stuff on the dyno. We had a late 90s camaro that we put a small fogger shot on it. I think we hit about 350 at the wheel, but It was done after three pulls. I'm talking puke tank running over, pinging to beat the band, it was done. Not long after that, there was a student (older gentalman, and I say that because he had more money then us average broke school kid ) who had the same body style Firebird with about 10k into the engine bay and drivetrain. That thing pulled about a dozen 400+ HP pulls and never broke a sweat, never broke 210. I thought that was pretty cool. I learned that no 2 hp are equal that day. Still have the dyno sheet from the camaro I melted down too.. If I could find a camaro, I would build a model to go with it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now