NoOp Gives Exerpts From Jim Wanger's Book Titled "Glory Days".
NoOption5L
damn it! Besides working about 60-70 hours a week, teaching my daughter how to
drive (now there's a story for yah), working on the SVT LTD, I've been typing
up good interesting stuff for ya'll to read... what else...?
WARNING! This post is LONG so you might want to just print it out and read it.
But anyways... read on. Again, it's from Jim Wanger's booked titled "Glory
Days". Good stuff... a must read for any _real_ car enthusiast.
--
"They were named the Plymouth Fury, the Dodge D-500, and the Desoto Adventurer.
The most interesting thing about each of these cars was that, taking
horsepower and weight into consideration, Chrysler was actually marketing the
first true musclecars, almost ten years ahead of their time."
NoOp comment: This kinda stirs up that whole what defines a musclecar debate
again, doesn't it?
--
NoOp comment: Now Jim Wangers talks about the compromised quality of the '57
Plymouths--namely window leaks.
"Plymouth prepared a demonstration for the press to show they were fixing the
problem. They set up a very elaborate water spray booth at the end of the
assembly line. Once the spray was turned off, a team of inspectors would
carefully examine each car for leaks. If there were any leaks, that car would
be shuffled off to the "Hospital" for a quick repair. Cars without leaks would
be taken to the marshalling yard and put on a truck for delivery to a dealer."
Then later Jim writes, "What we didn't tell the press was that the cars that
leaked actually went around the back of the plant and got on the same trucks to
be shipped to the dealers. There was no "Hospital." One out of every three
cars leaked, and the factory relied on the dealers to fix them before they were
sold."
NoOp comment: Yikes!! Where was JD Power when this was going on?
--
"It's late and your bedroom window is open, It's so quiet you can hear the
frogs croaking out by the crossroads a good 1/4 mile away. After a while a
big-engined Something rumbles in the night. It checks for a moment at the
light, then swings out onto the highway. Suddenly a rising moan overrides the
rumble as a bunch of extra throats get kicked wide open and start vacuuming air
by cubic acre. The moan gets drowned out in its turn by a booming exhaust note
that someone ought to bottle and sell as pure essence of Car. Three times the
sound peaks, falls back, peaks again. The last shift into forth, a throttling
back to cruising speed, a dwindling grumble of thunder, and... gone. The frogs
take up again where they left off. Have you tried one of our 421s?
A NoOp comment: This came from an ad that Pontiac used in 1964 for their ol'
421 Tri-powers. Pretty neat stuff, huh?
--
"The cliché' "race on Sunday, sell on Monday" wasn't always true. Ford spent
millions of dollars fielding specific drag cars that competed in every NHRA
class. Thousands of fans would watch these Fords win of the strip, and then
head out to the parking lot and drive home in their Pontiac GTOs, perhaps
beating a Mustang or humbling a Fairlane GT at the stoplight. Ford didn't
understand the difference between racing and performance. One did not
necessarily sell the other, especially as racing fans became more sophisticated
and recognized these special-built cars were nothing like what was available in
Ford showrooms. To their credit, Ford did turn things around in the eighties
with the "5.0" Mustang. The Ford dealer Motorsports program of today is almost
an exact copy of the Royal (Bobcat) operation of the sixties."
NoOp Comment: Manufacturers please take note. This is how you market
performance cars.
--
"In the meantime, they were doing a lot of photography with the two Pontiacs."
NoOp comment: "Two Pontiacs" being the two GTOs that were used during Car and
Driver's 1964 magazine article that pitted the GTO against the Ferrarri GTO.
One was a stock Sports Coupe with a standard suspension, a 348 hp Tri-power, a
wide ratio 4-speed gearbox, and a 3.55:1 rear end. This car, "the blue car",
was a pre-production, hand-built pilot line car that was "exceptionally well
assembled". It was used for street driving and for road course and skid pad
testing. The second car, "the red car", also had a 348 Tri-power engine, but
used a close-ratio 4-speed, and a 3.90:1 limited-slip rear end. Wangers had
this red car set up by Royal Bobcat specifically for the acceleration part of
the road test. Back to the story...
"One of the things that surprised me was that they had more photographic
equipment than testing equipment. There was no fifth wheel, no accelerometer,
and no sophisticated trap lights of any kind, though they did manage to produce
a couple of stop watches. It became apparent they weren't going to do any
serious testing on the cars, but just go by "seat of the pants" feel." When
they came up with 0-60 in 4.6 seconds, and 0-100 in 11.8 seconds, I knew it was
time for me to "shut up and watch." Our red GTO wouldn't run from 0-100 in 11.8
seconds if it had been dropped off the top of the Empire State Building. What
they didn't know was that "the red car" was a "ringer". The car was built with
a 389 cubic inch Tri-power engine. However, I had it converted almost
immediately to a 421 cubic inch H.O Tri-power engine. With the engine in the
car, once the "pyramid" casting was removed from the distributor boss and
casting numbers were updated, there was no visual way to tell the difference."
NoOp comment: The point is: Performance sold cars in the 60's. Manufacturers
often made sure their cars were very well "prepped" when they were used for
magazine road tests. They knew that a "bad" road test could kill a new model.
--
"Without a doubt, 1966 was our year. We had many successful tie-in promotions,
our aggressive Tiger activity, our great advertising, and our new fastback roof
styling. Was it any wonder the GTO set its all-time sales record that year,
outselling all other musclecars combined?"
NoOp comment: In '66, the GTO out sold all the other musclecars combined...
amazing! And now Ford has the same type of market domination with the Mustang,
outselling the F-body twins nearly 3:1. The power of marketing!
--
"Just as we were adjusting to the death of the Tiger, were hit with a corporate
announcement that all multiple carburetion options on GM cars, i.e. Tri-Power,
would be discontinued with the start of the 1967 model year. Only Chevrolet's
Corvette would be exempt. GM's motivation was self-serving. They could now
boast to the government that they had again taken steps to downplay performance
and the encouragement of aggressive driving."
NoOp comment: This kills me! Right now, anyone with a driver's license can
buy any number of sport bikes that'll rip off 10 and 11 second 1/4 mile times,
but let an auto-manufacturer build a really fast car (not a limited production
model), and watch the Feds/lawyers snuff it out. The same thing with loud
exhaust. If you ride a loud-ass Harley, somehow you're exempt from the law,
and the cops leave you alone. But, uncork your car's exhaust and watch the
cops be all over you like flies on shit. Why are motorcycles exempt from this
stuff and cars are not? Anyone...?
--
"Offering a tachometer as a factory option was not a new idea, but mounting it
on the hood, right in the driver's sight was brilliant. Though in all honesty
it was useless to a serious racer. Every time the hood was dropped, even
normally, the shock would knock the tach out of calibration. What "made" the
hood tach was its marketing opportunities. The fact that it sat out on the
hood where everyone could see it gave immediate impact: "Hey, this guy's got a
tach, so that must be a fast car", envious observers would say. And it
worked."
NoOp comment: The same types of things still work today, just ask any "rice
boy".
--
"Ford was never really a competitor during the mid-sixties. Their high
performance, or "Hi-Po" 289 cubic inch engine was the only true street
performance powerplant they offered. It was a real screamer, but it had too
few cubic inches and not enough torque--and it used solid lifters, resulting in
the classic tuning problems. Ford had built some limited production special
vehicles that performed very well on the racetrack, but this never translated
into a good, high performance Ford you could buy right off the showroom floor.
They offered nothing, and nobody seemed to care."
NoOp comment: This is why I hate Ford's limited-production, high-dollar Cobra
Rs. Great cars, but unless the average blue-collar enthusiast can buy 'em,
they don't mean shit. Build stuff that kicks ass and takes names on the
street. That's what the GTOs and our beloved 5-ohs did. THAT'S why the GTO
ruled the marketplace in the 60's, and that's why the Mustang is still so
popular today.
--
"We pulled in alongside them with our white "Goat".
NoOp comment: This white GTO had "good" cylinder heads, extra thin head
gaskets, rocker arm lockouts, a very fast distributor advance curve, and 3.90:1
gears. Back to the story...
"From our experience, we knew that the Chrysler Hemi, unless it was really
prepped, was not a good street machine. It had a bad habit of destroying its
spark plugs when just cruising around." We predicted this Hemi to be a high
13-second car, running a little over 100 mph. Our white GTO automatic had run
at the track in the low 13's at close to 106 mph..."
NoOp comment: Wanger's book validates what I've been saying all along. Most
street cars back then ran 13s-14's and high 90s/low 100s trap speeds.
--
'Incidentally, the entire Road Runner concept was suggested by Brock Yates, who
at the time was a successful columnist for Car and Driver."
NoOp comment: ...and he still is. Take note you Car and Driver magazine
bashers. --
NoOp comment: Now Jim talks about the GTO Judge.
Nevertheless, it was still a great promotion and a great car. But can you
image trying to sell it today as we did in 1969? A bright-orange-colored car,
complete with matching pop-art decals strips and labels, built in Detroit with
a "kick-ass" engine that gets ten miles to a gallon, doesn't stop very well,
and won't go around corners!"
NoOp comment: SHIT! I'd MUCH rather buy modern-day GTO Judge, than the
ill-handling and braking 5-6,000 lbs 10-14 mile per gallon behemoths they
market as "sport" utility vehicles. Or, the bright-colored, heavily decaled,
Honda Civics that handle well, brake well, get good gas mileage, but have
"weak-ass" engines.
--
NoOp comment: Jim talking about Pontiac's famous Herb Adams.
"Herb was a suspension guy and was way ahead of his time. He didn't have much
patience for the teenage enthusiasts who embraced only straight-line muscle of
the GTO. He saw the excitement and sophistication of these new Detroit cars in
terms of handling and cornering."
NoOp comment: And the musclecar begins to evolve...
--
NoOp comment: Talking about the intro of '69 Trans Am.
"We invited all the enthusiasts magazines and leading west coast press to
"wring out" these two new special high-performance Pontiacs. It seemed as
though everyone misunderstood both cars, but were particularly hard on the
Trans Am. They couldn't understand any reason for its existence, calling it no
more than a Firebird 400 with racing stripes. Nobody took the car seriously,
particularly the Pontiac dealer. As a result, the Trans Am died an early
death, with only 697 of them having been built, including only eight
convertibles. While the Trans Am was certainly a capable car, it just never
got a chance. As a mater of fact, it was the one first outright Pontiac
failures since the start of the Wide-Track era."
NoOp comment: They couldn't give 'em away when they were brand new, but now
they command big bucks. Makes you wonder if we all shouldn't be snatching up
the LS1 twins. Damn it... I need to go back and work on building that crystal
ball...
--
"In January of 1969, we brought out our new '69 Ram Air IV Royal Bobcat to
Florida." "We wanted to remind people of the original 1962 Catalina Bobcat."
NoOp comment: Same old, same old. Selling the new by using original in the
marketing. Funny how things haven't changed...
"And it was fast. With a *blueprinted* Ram Air IV, a close-ratio 4-speed, and a
390:1 rear end it ran the quarter mile in the low 12.7s at 113 mph.
NoOp comment: WHAT!?! I thought they all ran these kinds of numbers straight
off the showroom floor...? :-)
--
The Ford problem was not their dealers, it was their cars. They did not build
a fast street car on their production line, or a street car that could easily
be made to go fast like the Royal Bobcat. They certainly knew how to build
one-of-a-kind race cars, like the Thunderbolt, or the Shelby Cobra, or the Boss
429, or the famed Tunnel Port, but that's exactly what they were, race cars
that performed magnificently on the track. Their street counterparts were
losers, especially when lined up alongside a good street car like a Royal
Bobcat GTO. The first good high-performance Ford street car was the 1969
Mustang Cobra-Jet, powered by a 428 cubic inch wedge engine, using hydraulic
valve lifters. This car was quick, yet streetable and reliable, and would
respond to tuning. Unfortunately, it didn't stick around in the Ford system
very long before it was modified to run with a solid lifter camshaft and became
just another good race car. The ugly truth was that nobody at Ford really
understood the difference between racing and performance."
NoOp comment: Ouch! The truth sometimes hurts.
--
"In the sixties, no company spent more money on building special-purpose race
cars than Ford. From NASCAR to Formula 1, Ford dominated racing and won
virtually every major event held around the world. But from all their
achievements on the track, they were unable to transfer that success to the
street. Part of the problem was the product, but even more so was an ineptness
in marketing their products properly. If the sixties were a disappointment for
Ford, the late 1980s and the early 1990s have belonged to Ford, thanks to the
5.0 Mustang. They combined all the elements that were necessary to make the
car outstanding, exciting, available and well-priced. It fit the exact mold we
had created with our GTO thirty years earlier. Ford supported the Mustang's
performance thanks to a special parts program made available through special
performance dealers. It's Royal Pontiac, Act III. With simple V-8 power in a
modestly-priced, good-looking car, marketed to a community that was hungry for
performance, Ford hit the target dead on. The car responds well to
modifications, and has in effect become the GTO of the '90s."
NoOp comment: The 5.0 Mustang the late-model GTO. Gosh, how many times have I
said that? I saw the resemblances between the 5-oh and the ol' GTO years ago.
"Now, as we go into the millennium, it appears the imports have learned the
same trick, especially Honda, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, and Mercedes. Each has
brought into the market place their versions of high performance personal cars
and are working with the next generation of high-tech sophistication."
NoOp comment: Two things. One, when is GM going to figure this out and get
THEIR shit together? They have the engine (LS1) now all they need is a good
solid RWD coupe platform. (Note: GM has lately been picking up many talented
execs/designers. I wouldn't be surprised to see GM do a huge turn-around in a
few years.) Two, it won't be too long and the imports will start putting
together V8s and RWD. The V8s are there (Tundra pickups) and with the imports
competitive nature, low-cost RWD car platforms can't be far behind. Oh, and
Subaru's WRX is going to be the next successor to the 5.0 Mustang and Turbo
DSMs. Mark my words!
Whelp, that's it. Interesting stuff, huh? But, go buy this book and read the
rest. Once you start reading it you won't be able to put it down. It's well
worth the 25 bucks. Hell, you probably wasted that much money going to or
renting shitty movies the last month or so. Now, just go buy the book and find
yourself living/reliving the 1960's...
Patrick
'93 Cobra - Best E.T. 13.44 / Best MPH 103.23
'83 Ford LTD
Former original owner - '87 5-liter, 5-speed LX
14.2 @ 98 stock - 13.8 @ 101 lightly modded
NoOp's Latest "Hot Pick" - The Toadies "Poosh That Hand"
Philly Essnillius
> "They were named the Plymouth Fury, the Dodge D-500, and the Desoto
Adventurer.
> The most interesting thing about each of these cars was that, taking
> horsepower and weight into consideration, Chrysler was actually marketing
the
> first true musclecars, almost ten years ahead of their time."
>
> NoOp comment: This kinda stirs up that whole what defines a musclecar
debate
> again, doesn't it?
Nah, the first musclecar was the '64 GTO, period. Big engine, intermediate
body.
One out of every three
> cars leaked, and the factory relied on the dealers to fix them before they
were
> sold."
>
> NoOp comment: Yikes!! Where was JD Power when this was going on?
It was still going on in 1969, and probably long after that. In '69, my
folks bought a beautiful new 4-door hardtop VIP (the top Plymouth Fury), and
fresh off the showroom floor it too leaked in the car wash. (By contrast,
my unrestored 31-year-old Cougar is dry as a bone.)
What
> they didn't know was that "the red car" was a "ringer". The car was built
with
> a 389 cubic inch Tri-power engine. However, I had it converted almost
> immediately to a 421 cubic inch H.O Tri-power engine. With the engine in
the
> car, once the "pyramid" casting was removed from the distributor boss and
> casting numbers were updated, there was no visual way to tell the
difference."
>
> NoOp comment: The point is: Performance sold cars in the 60's.
Manufacturers
> often made sure their cars were very well "prepped" when they were used
for
> magazine road tests. They knew that a "bad" road test could kill a new
model.
Same deal today. Makes you wonder how many ringer cars make it into the
press fleets today.
> "Without a doubt, 1966 was our year. We had many successful tie-in
promotions,
> our aggressive Tiger activity, our great advertising, and our new fastback
roof
> styling. Was it any wonder the GTO set its all-time sales record that
year,
> outselling all other musclecars combined?"
>
> NoOp comment: In '66, the GTO out sold all the other musclecars
combined...
> amazing! And now Ford has the same type of market domination with the
Mustang,
> outselling the F-body twins nearly 3:1. The power of marketing!
No matter what the product, people buy the make/model which best massages
their egos (and does the job or a reasonable facsimile thereof without
crapping out repeatedly).
But, uncork your car's exhaust and watch the
> cops be all over you like flies on shit. Why are motorcycles exempt from
this
> stuff and cars are not? Anyone...?
Hey, you missed the new FAQ while you were gone. You're not allowed to
question the actions of cops in this NG.
Every time the hood was dropped, even
> normally, the shock would knock the tach out of calibration.
That's funny. But none of the dashmounted mechanical tachs was worth diddly
either. The needles always overran on the way up, then swung back too far
on the low side, and by the time they caught on the drive again it was time
for another upshift and another overrun, to the point the needle's just
bouncing around meaninglessly.
>
> "Ford was never really a competitor during the mid-sixties.
Ahem, define mid-'60's. '65, '66, and '67, I'll go along with this
assessment. But dual quad 427's before and 428 Cobra Jets after were as
quick or quicker than anything else out there.
Build stuff that kicks ass and takes names on the
> street. That's what the GTOs and our beloved 5-ohs did. THAT'S why the
GTO
> ruled the marketplace in the 60's, and that's why the Mustang is still so
> popular today.
Ditto re the 5.0's, but I have NEVER seen a GTO that could actually get it.
> 'Incidentally, the entire Road Runner concept was suggested by Brock
Yates, who
> at the time was a successful columnist for Car and Driver."
>
> NoOp comment: ...and he still is. Take note you Car and Driver magazine
> bashers. --
If "Road Runner concept " means big engine in stripper mid-size, it was a
good idea. But the standard (383 4-bbl) Roadrunner was a hopeless dog and
cheap-feeling besides. But a stripper Road Runner 440, now THAT was a
concept.
> NoOp comment: Now Jim talks about the GTO Judge.
>
> Nevertheless, it was still a great promotion and a great car. But can you
> image trying to sell it today as we did in 1969? A bright-orange-colored
car,
> complete with matching pop-art decals strips and labels, built in Detroit
with
> a "kick-ass" engine that gets ten miles to a gallon, doesn't stop very
well,
> and won't go around corners!"
>
> NoOp comment: SHIT! I'd MUCH rather buy modern-day GTO Judge, than the
> ill-handling and braking 5-6,000 lbs 10-14 mile per gallon behemoths they
> market as "sport" utility vehicles. Or, the bright-colored, heavily
decaled,
> Honda Civics that handle well, brake well, get good gas mileage, but have
> "weak-ass" engines.
Touche, NoOp, touche!
> "And it was fast. With a *blueprinted* Ram Air IV, a close-ratio 4-speed,
and a
> 390:1 rear end it ran the quarter mile in the low 12.7s at 113 mph.
>
> NoOp comment: WHAT!?! I thought they all ran these kinds of numbers
straight
> off the showroom floor...? :-)
No way. With a 390:1 gear, you need about 650,000 rpm to trap 113. Only a
blue-printed motor can stand up to that kind of punishment.
The first good high-performance Ford street car was the 1969
> Mustang Cobra-Jet, powered by a 428 cubic inch wedge engine, using
hydraulic
> valve lifters. This car was quick, yet streetable and reliable, and would
> respond to tuning. Unfortunately, it didn't stick around in the Ford
system
> very long before it was modified to run with a solid lifter camshaft and
became
> just another good race car.
> NoOp comment: Ouch! The truth sometimes hurts.
The problem is, none of the foregoing is true. The CJ came out in March
'68, over six months prior to the '69 model year, and it was never equipped
with solid lifters. It was replaced by the 385-series 429 in '71. This was
not an improvement, but the Muscle Car was dead by the end of the '71 model
year anyway, including the GTO and the Trans Am. And it was not because
Ford didn't understand retail performance and Pontiac did. So Mr. Wanger's
telling some stretchers in this excerpt.
--
Yrs, Philly Thunder Snake 28
See my car photo albums at
http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=6&uid=116159&