|11-23-2005 10:08 PM|
|11-23-2005 09:43 PM|
|11-23-2005 09:22 PM|
I generally stick with Chevys but do not care for the 70 Chevelles much. I would much rather have a Chevelle in the 64-67 range. The 454s had a couple different power ratings in 1970. In this case I would definitely have to choose the Road Runner, they were cool cars.
Primerat, time does wonders for technology. Todays cars come with engines that even racers would have loved to have 35 years ago. Engines are coming from the factory with electronic fuel injection, superchargers, roller camshafts and quite frequently multiple camshafts along with other far more advanced equipment than was available even 15 years ago. Heck even spark plug wires are becoming less frequent on new cars. Todays engineers have the benefit of computer design and modeling, even CNC machining.
Cars in 1970 still had points ignition systems, engine driven fans, mechanical fuel pumps and carburetors. How many new cars do you see running around with that kind of equipment? Ford did have an OHC 427 that was produced in very limited numbers and Chrysler experimented with a DOHC 426 but was never put into production. As I understand it NASCAR mandated pushrod engines only so the engines were never built on a large scale.
Engines and cars constantly evolve and improve. Fast cars of the 1940s got their butts kicked by fast cars of the 1950s, just as those cars got their butts kicked by cars built in the 60s and early 70s. I remember reading a short blurb in a car mag a while back that had a picture of an early 1900s race car that featured a 500+ci horizontally opposed twin that made about 50hp and did 0-60 in almost 60 seconds. 500ci engines today are capable of over 300 mph in the 1/4.
I cant find it now but as far as street driven cars go there was a clip floating around on this board of a 67 Chevelle that put over 1000hp to the ground and had trap speeds nearing 160 mph.
|11-23-2005 08:53 PM|
I like the Chevelle personaly, It has a real reputation for being the baddest muscle car. Plus it's a chevy, good all around package, handling, braking, reliable, affordable, real slick lookin'
I love the Hemi engine, definite reputation there. It's just to bad they couldn't make a good car to put them in. Good lookin' car though.
I'd proudly own either one, but I favor the LS6 (not the gen III "LS6")
|11-23-2005 08:40 PM|
the big difference in top speed of new cars is only due to the overdrive. Ive personally taken my nova to 130 and could go much faster if only i had an overdrive. Just imagine an old hemi with a dual overdrive 6 speed it could probably get close to 180 with the right gears.
|11-23-2005 06:56 PM|
|stepside454||yes it is a street legal car...but how streetable, check the specks on the car. there is a huge differance between street legal & streetable. also notice that Mustang is using a 300 HP plate nitrous set up.|
|11-23-2005 04:30 PM|
which is better
The muscle cars are factory hotrods. Stock ? the 302 is not stock but it is a street car. How many street drivin big block chevelles or mopars are running 150 mph, none that I know of. Don't get me wrong I love these old cars just brought it up for sake of discussion. Thanks AL
|11-23-2005 09:19 AM|
PrimeRat,that vid doesnt back up your statement, that car isnt stock by anymeans.
the 13 sec. cars of the 60s were run on bias ply tires, no radials, no slicks, no traction controlso it was big peddlefest to get em moving.
Also remember, you could buy one of these cars for around 3 grand brand new..as apposed to nowadays 25grand & up.
Now I do agree that todays muscle care are impressive, new technology is very cool, Imean, how would the Road runner have done back in the day with modern tires roller cams, fast burn chambers , EFI etc. etc. etc.
|11-23-2005 08:59 AM|
|11-23-2005 08:54 AM|
which is better
thats www.bldracing.org click on video
|11-23-2005 08:52 AM|
witch is better
I know this is off topic but I couldn't help wonder how we call these old mucsle cars fast 13 seconds is weak . check out what a small block Ford can do 302 cuin. www.bldracing .org thanks AL
|11-23-2005 08:04 AM|
chevelle Vs roadrunner
I looked up the times on both the cars and the roadrunner was faster.
roadrunner- 0-60: 5.3, 1/4:13.55 @105 hp:425@5000 tq:490@4000
chevelle (ls6)- 0-60: 6.1 1/4: 13.7 @103 hp: 450@ 5600 tq: 500@3600
Im a chevy guy but those hemis are fast.
|11-22-2005 06:10 PM|
As a past owner of said 70 Chevelle. Back in the day. I can tell you that many times the old mighty Hemi MoPar would pass you right at the first mph lights. Seems like they would get a second wind at about 1100 ft and GO ON BY!!! Been There!!!!!
But they are far from cheap to build and maintain. Then and especially now!
|11-22-2005 05:45 PM|
Well, this question is going to open up a can of worms but what the hay, we need a lively and FRIENDLY discussion today anyway. ACCENT ON THE FRIENDLY PART GUYS!
Here's my take.....
The Chevelle is just another Chevy, no matter what engine is under the hood. The Roadrunner on the other hand is a classic muscle car. When equipped with the legendary 426 Hemi the Roadrunner not only out horsepowers the Chevelle but out classes it as well. The Chevelle of course is way cheaper than the Roadrunner. Class, as we all know costs money.
OK all you Chevy guys, have at it.
|11-22-2005 04:45 PM|
|Henry Highrise||Welcome....What do you mean by better? Those are both great cars.|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|