What Were the Top Speeds of the 60's and 70's Muscle cars?
Bob May
fun with them womping thier butts in the higher speeds. From 60-90,
they'd keep even with me but after that, I would often back off on the
throttle just to keep a hood ahead of them. At about 120 or so, I'd
put the foot back down and show them what '56 Tbird taillights look
like as they disappear in the distance. The close ratio 4 speeds were
also a real bad joke as the car would take a while in the tall first
gear getting going and then the guy would spend all of his time
changing gears and not getting any faster.
--
Bob May
Don't subscribe to ACCESS1 for your webserver for the low prices. The
service has
been lousy and has been poor for the last year. Bob May
Bob May
will have to admit that I had been praticing on the barrel ride
(remember that one where you spin around on the inside of a huge
barrel?) and the guy that owned it was amazed. I really had to strech
as the seat was really sprung back. He said that we were going
through 60mph (by the speedo which was probably at least 10mph slow)
when I picked the bill off of the dash. That was a quick car and was
the fastest thing that any of my friends had. My '56 TBird did have a
higher top speed than that GTX which pretty much topped out at 140mph.
I still had a bit of omph but didn't do a real dart ahead like I did
with other cars.
HotRod8288
know this was the case with the Trans Am series race cars and street
counterparts.
C. E. White
> the fastest thing that any of my friends had. My '56 TBird did have a
> higher top speed than that GTX which pretty much topped out at 140mph.
> I still had a bit of omph but didn't do a real dart ahead like I did
> with other cars.
Your 1956 Ford Thunderbird had a top speed higher than 140 mph? Was it
stock?
Regards,
Ed White
z
trans would reach 70 if you kept it floored long enough.
In article <20000521014609...@ng-fy1.aol.com>,
magi...@aol.com (Magic2626) wrote:
> Personal experience:
> Trans Am in its second year could do over 140 on the speedo... and
> it was
> fairly stable at speed . This car had better all around
> performance than any
> 60's or 70's detroit car I had a chance to drive.
> 1967 Corvette Convertible with 427 and 3 2 barrels topped out
> around 110 due to
> gearing. And it was a handful when driven hard, but it felt great
> cruising
> through town.
> Friend's with street driven late 60's GTO's were running 1/4 miles
> somewhere in
> the 11 second range.
> Most of the muscle cars of that era were going 90 to 110 mph when
> they went
> into the woods at the end of a straightaway.Brakes, handling,
> sheer mass, and
> lack of driver skill were to blame I'm sure.
> There were always kids talking about this car or that doing 150
> mph +, but
> until I drove Porsches I never saw 150 to 170 mph +.
> The musclecars cars were fun, and they had a style all their own.
> But I feel
> safer in German cars.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Richard Bell
Rocker Fella <sbe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I had a 69 Road Runner, 383, auto trans, with 3:2? rr. I had up to 115 it
>was still climbing strong, but had to back off because of a light. I never
> had the desire to go that fast in it again, it was my main transportation
>so I didnt take many chances. I met someone with a 440 GTX he was caught
>on radar doing well over 140+.
>
My '76 T-Bird, which is hardly in top form, will accelerate to 110 mph and
I have never had the nerve to push it further (my tires are only rated for
120). That 460 has gobs of torque, and, after the ignition module failed,
managed to move that heavy car while only firing on three or four cylinders.
Bob May
but over 3000 it wailed nicely. It was balanced and had high rpm
lifters in it and headers. I could easily hit 160 for decent periods
of time and at those speeds, the car was getting about 20mpg which was
really sad as when the 55mph speed limit came along, the car would
only get 16mpg. Best fuel economy was 80-100mph where it got about
25mpg.
Steve Bigelow
Bob May wrote in message ...
>I could easily hit 160 for decent periods
How do you know the mileage at 160 mph?
Clifton T. Sharp Jr.
> I don't believe the 3.08 RE's in the 396s as I used to have so much
> fun with them womping thier butts in the higher speeds. From 60-90,
> they'd keep even with me but after that, I would often back off on the
> throttle just to keep a hood ahead of them. At about 120 or so, I'd
> put the foot back down and show them what '56 Tbird taillights look
> like as they disappear in the distance.
One night many years ago on a deserted stretch of expressway at 2 AM, a
Chevelle SS396 pulled up and started goosing the gas as though he wanted
to race. Now, we're doing 70 to 75 MPH (my speedometer was broken), I in
my 1960 Pontiac with the ratty, worn, missing 390/2V, and he's got this
large chrome hood scoop and headers on an obviously heavily-modified
vehicle, so I was going to decline. But my friend talked me into it, and
I floored it and so did the other car.
Several miles later, unable to get his back bumper ahead of my front
bumper, the guy motioned for us to stop to compare notes on our powerful
cars. He was absolutely crushed to look under my hood and see the old
lumpy powerplant that was able to keep up with him with ease.
No, top end was not a strong suit of the 396. However, off the line, he
was certainly able to easily leave us behind.
--
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Cliff Sharp | "light jazz" is to jazz as "rubber band" is to orchestra. |
| WA9PDM | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- http://www.spamfree.org/ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Chuck Sterling
considering the handling some of those iron lumps displayed. But the
Mopar police cars with the big hemi engines would roll 160 and stay on
the road to boot. Corvettes were pretty quick, you could cruise above
130 without much trouble. The supercharged Studebaker Avanti was fast on
the top end, but I don't recall details; seems to me they were built on
a modified station wagon chassis but I might be all wet on that. They
came out while I was in high school and I've never ridden in nor driven
one. But I did have a friend that stuck one of those engines in a '63
Studebaker Lark Daytona and got it to about 130; not bad for a box with
wheels.
Chuck Sterling
Rocker Fella wrote:
>
> Most came standard with rear ends in the 3:20s range with optional lower
> gears for quicker acceleration but limiting top end. What was the average
> max top end on these cars with standard rear ends.
> Factory Stock Cars like
> 383- 426 hemi RoadRunners
> 396 chevys
> or any and all Brand popular muscle cars of the era?
> I cant find many specs on the internet except
> for the 65 GTO top end was only 115 mph, (small block 326 I think maybe
> 389 cant find the website I read it) but 0-60 was in the 5 sec range.
> Quick but not much top end. Most of these cars back in the day were mostly
> setup 1/4 mile et times so
> finding E/Ts for these cars is not difficult but hardly any mention of
> flat out speeds...do YOU know?
Nathan J. Nagel
Chuck Sterling wrote:
>
> Most were geared for a top end in the 120-130 mph range, which is smart
> considering the handling some of those iron lumps displayed. But the
> Mopar police cars with the big hemi engines would roll 160 and stay on
> the road to boot. Corvettes were pretty quick, you could cruise above
> 130 without much trouble. The supercharged Studebaker Avanti was fast on
> the top end, but I don't recall details; seems to me they were built on
> a modified station wagon chassis but I might be all wet on that. They
> came out while I was in high school and I've never ridden in nor driven
> one. But I did have a friend that stuck one of those engines in a '63
> Studebaker Lark Daytona and got it to about 130; not bad for a box with
> wheels.
>
> Chuck Sterling
>
Chuck,
AFAIK pretty much all Stude products '53-on were built on variations of
the same frame. The Avanti had an X-member like a convertible, but the
suspension etc. was similar to other models, although the rear had some
extra links that only the late hi-po models got. I don't have a shop
manual for an Avanti so I can't compare exact specs for you, but the
kingpins, etc. were all similar - apparently it's relatively easy to
retrofit Avanti front discs to older models assuming you can find the
parts. One downside to the Stude chassis is that the frame is
relatively flexible and relies on the body for some of its strength,
it's not a good idea to try to align body panels if the car is on
jackstands. Also they can crack around the front spring perches, I had
to have some welding done on my '56 Golden Hawk (with Packard 352 motor
- can't complain too much after 44 years of carrying all that weight) in
that area - I had some reinforcement plates welded in as well just for
piece of mind, although I suppose I might lose a few points at a show if
I were going for a full-on restoration. The Lark is surprisingly
similar to all other Stude products in terms of frame and suspension -
they played with wheelbase a few times and moved crossmembers around but
other than that a lot of parts remained the same.
nate
--
Opinions expressed in this message are those of the author, which may or
may not coincide with those of Ellenco, Inc.
Rocker Fella
just speculation and a few stories. Anyway most of the cars back then had
either 3 speed auto, or 4spd manuals. ..now if they were equipped with
todays 4spd autos and 5 or 6 speed manuals I would imagine many would top
out around 150+. For instance I know my old 69 383 RoadRunner would do at
least 120 mph I sort of suspect well over 120 with its 3spd auto, add
overdrive I bet it would have seen 130+ or maybe 140.
Bob Nixon
wrote:
>Nope, 289 with a Paxton supercharger on it. Not much power under 2500
>but over 3000 it wailed nicely. It was balanced and had high rpm
>lifters in it and headers. I could easily hit 160 for decent periods
>of time and at those speeds, the car was getting about 20mpg which was
>really sad as when the 55mph speed limit came along, the car would
>only get 16mpg. Best fuel economy was 80-100mph where it got about
>25mpg.
Hmmm... Unless you're got more guts than brains, I'd hope you had
modern tires and BRAKES too? BTW, I guess you can blame the low end
gutlessness on that Centrifugal PAXTON blower.
Bob Nixon
http://members.home.net/bigrex/
Mike Romain
Most of the folks and especially the older Roadrunners were geared for
the 1/4 mile boosts.
120 must have had you just about tached out.
I ran against two friends with the 383 with six packs (3 - 2 barrels,
eh) on top. They could whomp my butt off the line, but I always top
ended them out in my Mini Cooper-S with it's 10" tires. (4800 RPM's =
132 MPH in my Mini And she would tach out at 5600, ;-) )
So your answer is in the stories....
Some had 1/4 mile rear ends and some had highway rear ends. Like
comparing apples and oranges.
There isn't a real 'black and white' answer to your question, it depends
on the machine.
My $0.02,
Mike
BB Wolf
Basically it all gets down to how the car was set up. The main factor for
Top Speed is the rear end gear ratio. Like a lot of guys have said, most of
the Muscle cars where built for stop light to stop light battles, meaning
they usually sported 3.50 - 4.56 gear ranges.
The top speed cars usually had gears from 2.70 - 3.50 range. Now don't
forget there are a whole host of other factors that come into play for top
end speed; Horsepower, Aerodynamics (drag), Total Weight (mass), and finally
BALLS (read stupidity), etc...
Here's a personal example; I owned a 72 Lemans, with a modified '70' 400,
putting out around 375 HP, slightly "jacked" rearend, 2.70 "Jet" gear
rearend. One late night,
a buddy and I "foolishly" raced down a 4 lane highway. He had a pretty stout
Mustang II which had a "calibrated" SW speedometer. He kicked my ass of the
line, but because of my gearing and other factors was finally able to pass
him. When I did so, he said he was between 130 -140 MPH. We figured I was in
the 140 - 145 MPH range! I know that for a fact, because I'm sure there are
still "brown streaks" on the Lemans seat !!!
I hit a small bump in the road shortly thereafter, and just about lost it !!
I and the car would have been totally desinigrated !!
Oh....To be young and Stupid....and live to tell about it !!
- Take care,
-ERIC
Rocker Fella <sbe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8gci0...@enews4.newsguy.com...
BB Wolf
--
-ERIC
Mr. Fun <gri...@primenet.com> wrote in message
news:226fissjp2cqubjhr...@4ax.com...
> My 69 Firebird 400 had a 2.80 rear axle and 3 speed automatic and
> would top out at 137 mph and the engine was running 5000 rpm. It was
> a little doggy off the line with that rear end but once it got rolling
> it had legs.
Malcolm
scenario.
Let's assume a typical vehicle of the time with 4.11 gearing and (in today's
terms) about 225/70R15 tires (probably about a L70-15 tire of the time).
Typical redline on the engines then were maybe 5500 RPM.
Tire circumference comes out to about 84 inches, meaning the wheels will
make 754 revs in a mile. With the engine at full tilt in top gear
(disregarding torque converter slippage in an auto) which was usually always
a straight 1:1 ratio, the engine can turn the axle 5500 / 4.11 times per
minute or 1338 revs/minute. Divide the 1338 by 754 and you get about 1.77 or
1.77 miles in a minute, which translates to 106 MPH. A 3.73 axle figures out
to 117 MPH top end.
All other things equal, change to a "sedan" gearing of 2.73 and assume the
more moderately tuned engine will still pull redline in top gear and you get
a top speed of 160 MPH. A 3.23 axle would pull to about 130, and so on and
so on.....
Point being, most muscle cars, as mentioned earlier, had typically 3.5 to
4.11 gearing from the factory for straight-line acceleration. Passenger cars
typically in the 2.5 to 3.5 range, making them have a potentially higher
top-end, though reduced torque and horsepower limited top-ends on those
vehicles.
Pingaman
In high school I had a 69 SS427 caprice though it seems there were none made
but I found the assembly line papers woven into the seat springs and they
documented the ss package and the fact that it was a caprice. This car was
the personal car (special order maybe?) of the owner of Luby Chevrolet in
miami. The car was loaded and even had squirters in the wheelwells for
melting ice though the advertisements of the day said you could put some
sort of trak bite in the res. for summer fun. I really should have kept
the car. Anyway, it was quite a fast car and I never got beat by anything
in the flying mile races we conducted on alligator alley but it buried the
120mph speedo long before the car stopped pulling. The car had 3.07 gears
and I ran out of horses before the redline came up.
Later, I purchased a L-88 from the widow of a man who lived near my bus
stop. I remember not getting on the bus to help out with his building of
aluminum Can/Am engines and I remember helping him spec. the crank on a
L-88. He later died at riverside in a porsche that had thinwall tubing for
the cage which cost him his life. A few months later, I was getting the
widow's lawnmower out of the shed and I saw the uncompleted L-88 and bought
it for $500!!
With stock closed chamber heads, a 290 duration cam, and a holley 3 barrel,
the car would pull to the 7,000 redline with 3.07 gears and big goodyear
blue streak specials which were the rage of the day for police interceptors
Not sure how fast it was but the car was going fast enough to suck out the
side windows so much that I thought they would break.
Through a slight bit of skill, highschool quick reactions, and stupid luck,
I survived. This might have had something to do with the fact that I ran
the same size front as the rear tires. I do remember racing my friend in
his Boss 302 with my bridgeported 13-b RX-2 and I ran out of revs at
8000rpms.........He was still pulling away as my speedo remained pegged at
130mph but we all know how inaccurate speedos are.
I would think that the fastest of the 60s cars was either the 65 corvette
with the 425 horse 396 or the later L-88 and ZL-1 equipped models.
Other fast ones were the 69 ram air 400 firebird though most musclecars were
geared for low ETs.
I still have the top end bug 20 years later and have maxed out most every
car I have driven. The fastest "stock" car I have driven was a 300zx twin
turbo of which I have driven many being a nissan mechanic. These cars will
pull hard right up to the limiter which is set around 160 or 165mph. funny
thing with those 300ZXs is that no two ever performed the same even when set
to the same specs.
Bob Nixon
>There is one article on a stock 60s vette 327/365 or 375hp that did 180mph.
These obviously did not have stock gearing. A showroom stock, I doubt
it ;)
BTW, the 1963 231 cu in. (3.8l) 265HP DOHC I6 Jag XKE's would do
150MPH.
Bob Nixon
http://members.home.net/bigrex/
Pingaman
where you could order just about anything. A far cry from only having the
option of picking through the dealer inventory. My high school car I
described was not a model ever sold but it could be ordered. Many gearsets
were available for the corvette.
BB Wolf
He's told me of a few high speed runs in it. I seem to remember him
mentioning hitting 160 MPH from Erie, Pa to Pittsburgh. He was racing a
Vette the whole way!
--
-ERIC
Bob Nixon <big...@nospam.home.com> wrote in message
news:VOguOUymbrOtJ54+h=Hpieu...@4ax.com...
Pingaman
notsore...@gmail.com
But uh, yeah, hello from the future, 2017, from Romania out of all places.
coman...@gmail.com
> Thought it'd be funny to reply to a 17 year old topic.
>
> But uh, yeah, hello from the future, 2017, from Romania out of all places.
Coincidence? I think not! *Illuminati music starts playing*