You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
The 74 mustang was a turd. But then so was everything else after about 73. GM in particular had some real dog 350s they put in the Camaro circa mid 1970s. Think 150hp in a 350ci engine.
Disgusting I know. If you were into muscle cars back in the late sixties and early seventies I'm sure you could find very few reasons to own one of the newer ones at that point. Probably VERY disappointing.
not all of it. 74 you still had the SD firebirds, S3 454 chevelles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gman73
I see. Wasn't insurance cost one of the reasons they rated the cars net hp after 1971?
no. they underrated beforehand to lower insurance(L88, LS6, DZ302)
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
Damn, I didn't research each and every car before posting this. :jerkoff: So, a few of the cars hp might be bit off. I thought it was pretty cool information. It goes to show how much technology has improved. Our small 281-302 V8s fair pretty well against the bigblocks of the 60s and early 70s.
Okay, so I didn't research each and every car before posting this. So, a few of the cars hp might be bit off. I thought it was pretty cool information. It goes to show how much technology has improved. Our small 281-302 V8s fair pretty well against the bigblocks of the 60s and early 70s.
Our small 281-302 V8s fair pretty well against the bigblocks of the 60s and early 70s.
True to some extend...
Put a big block from that era in your car and you'll realize that our little 281 and such is rather boring.
I like to see a stock 4.6 in a Torino and see how well that car moves, compares to a 351C or bigger.
The 74 mustang was a turd. But then so was everything else after about 73. GM in particular had some real dog 350s they put in the Camaro circa mid 1970s. Think 150hp in a 350ci engine.
Disgusting I know. If you were into muscle cars back in the late sixties and early seventies I'm sure you could find very few reasons to own one of the newer ones at that point. Probably VERY disappointing.
The last great cars of the musclecar era were made in 1970. All the compression ratios were in the schitter by 1971.
In the late sixties and early seventies what is key is the fact that all the true musclecars were just used cars so that's what we drove. My first car was a 1968 Chevelle with a dealer installed 365hp 327, M-22 and 4.11s. I paid $700 bucks for it. I hammered it for two years and traded it in for a 365hp '68 Vette. (That 365hp 327 is one of the finest engines ever made. Four bolt mains and steel cranks. Bulletproof.)
Disco people bought the new crap. The bad times were the eighties, all the old iron was drying up and the second wave of musclecars hadn't arrived yet.
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
