Reliability is Lexus.
American muscle is my
Posted on 10/10/2020 10:57:31 AM PDT by RomanSoldier19
Rear doors. I was referencing front doors.
BOAT
Bust Out Another Thousand.
Reliability is Lexus.
American muscle is my
Spyktr's post #32 about his boss's experience is obviously about the rear doors, though he may not realize it. That's why I posted #40.
I said “lease”, not “buy”.
“In the 2000s I had a situation at a client’s place where we ended up proving that a restored Chevelle 454SS was slower and had less wheel horsepower than the receptionist’s Honda Accord V6. And I got a steak dinner out of it. :D”
They must have put in a 6-cylinder during the restoration!
“and a lot of the cars of the 80s were faster than most or all of the classic muscle cars”
The 80’s? LOL!
1982 Corvette: 200 hp! Slower than the new Accord!
Yeah, and right there you show your prejudice. The American marques were mostly crap, but the *imports* were making actual fast (for the day) cars, that were faster than the ‘muscle’ cars.
Nope, correctly blueprinted 454 motor. We had a chassis dyno and the Chevelle’s wheel horsepower was in the 230 range, the Accord was putting down ~245 IIRC.
“Yeah, and right there you show your prejudice. The American marques were mostly crap, but the *imports* were making actual fast (for the day) cars, that were faster than the ‘muscle’ cars.”
LOL! I bought an MGB in 1970 and a ‘65 XKE in ‘72.
Now you are shifting to imports! Comparing super expensive imports to everyday American cars is asinine.
The 1988 Callaway ZR1 would blow away any og those exotics.
1969 Mustang 351 did 0-60 in 8.0 seconds.
1984 Nissan 300ZX Turbo: 7.1 seconds.
1989 Plymouth Laser/Mitsubishi Eclipse Turbo: 6.6 seconds.
1986 Dodge Omni GLHS: 6.1 seconds
1986 Mitsubishi Starion ES: 7.5 seconds
1987 Toyota Supra Turbo: 6.4 seconds
That’s assuming you didn’t do something like cut and plug the obvious yellow colored vacuum hose printed with the admonition to NEVER CUT AND PLUG THIS HOSE that would give you a considerable horsepower boost. (Nissan Skyline, among others.)
See my prior post. Those weren’t super expensive imports. The Eclipse was a car cheap enough to be bought on a junior secretary’s salary in the day.
The 88 Callaway ZR1? Never existed. It’s either a *1990* ZR1 or the 88 Callaway Twin Turbo. The latter cost well in excess of $50K so it’s the “super expensive” exotic option, not the Nissan and Mitsu imports.
“Nope, correctly blueprinted 454 motor. We had a chassis dyno and the Chevelle’s wheel horsepower was in the 230 range, the Accord was putting down ~245 IIRC.”
The OEM 1971 LS5 (lowest hp 454) would easily do more at the wheel. Any built 454 should do better. The LS6 454 would put down more than 300.
No way a V-6 Accord puts down 245. I doubt even the 2020 278 hp would dyno 245 and you are obviously referring to an older model.
“1969 Mustang 351 did 0-60 in 8.0 seconds.”
ROTFLMAO! With granny rowing the gears?
The 351 was NOT a muscle car but the BOSS was under 6 seconds!
The 88 Callaway ZR1? Never existed.”
Lol! They even made one with an automatic!
From the Calloway website.
In October 1988, this turbocharged, street-driven C4 Corvette shattered the closed-circuit speed record with a run of 254.76 mph
You’re forgetting the 1973 454SS.
https://www.autobarnclassiccars.com/vehicles/378/1973-chevrolet-chevelle-ss
That’s a real car. It was also real crap at 245hp. Fortunately it wasn’t the car put on the dyno. But it disproves your assertion that it was the lowest HP 454.
What was on the dyno was a 72, the previous body style, with the LS-5 - all of 275hp, driving a Rockcrusher. Again, this was a restoration with a blueprinted stock engine, not something built up. If you want to go with modified numbers, the sky (and the owner’s money) is the limit and I get to bring in the 1800HP street-legal Supras.
You are forgetting that there used to be manual Accord V6s that didn’t have the power sucking automatic. The 2008-2012 Honda Accord 6MT Coupe (she had an 09 IIRC) ostensibly had 268hp at the crank but would routinely put down 240-250 on a chassis dyno. (The Japanese were (and are) playing the BMW game and deliberately underrating their engines - especially in the wake of the Ford Cobra R horsepower scandal and lawsuits) You also forget that FWD is more efficient than RWD in terms of power loss.
The dyno doesn’t lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BbaemNr9Vc&feature=emb_logo
That’s the Twin Turbo. The ZR1 was a factory car and not made by Callaway, and it was first sold in *1990*.
“The 88 Callaway ZR1? Never existed.”
supercars.net
1988 Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette
This Sledgehammer reached 254.76 mph at the Transportation Research Center (TRC) in Ohio and became the world’s fastest street-legal car for some time.
It was built up by Reeves Callaway in Connecticut as an example of what was possible with the new ZR1 and and turbocharging its LT5 engine.
Supercars.net is a bit mistaken there. Again. They’re pretty inaccurate.
https://www.mecum.com/lots/FL0114-173940/1988-chevrolet-corvette-callaway-sledgehammer/
That’s not a ZR1.
The ZR1 would not appear until the 90 model year and the engine is completely different looking - the 32V heads necessitate a different intake, etc.:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15141952/1990-chevrolet-corvette-zr-1-archived-test-review/
You are conflating the two cars.
“That’s a real car. It was also real crap at 245hp. Fortunately it wasn’t the car put on the dyno. But it disproves your assertion that it was the lowest HP 454.”
I was staying with the pre-emmision, pre-SAE numbers, using the LS5 instead of the LS6.
When I saw blue-printed and restored I was not thinking of a mid-70’s emission-throttled engine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.