just watched american muscle car
#1
just watched american muscle car
they were doing a factory rating shootout.
engine: ford 427
factory rating: 425hp
factory torque: 420ft-lbs
actual rating: 634hp
actual torque: 590-something ft-lbs
the biggest under-rater though was the 426 hemi
factory rating: 425hp
actual rating: 820hp
dont know if i believe that but damn still impressive
there is a part 2 next week
engine: ford 427
factory rating: 425hp
factory torque: 420ft-lbs
actual rating: 634hp
actual torque: 590-something ft-lbs
the biggest under-rater though was the 426 hemi
factory rating: 425hp
actual rating: 820hp
dont know if i believe that but damn still impressive
there is a part 2 next week
#2
RE: just watched american muscle car
ORIGINAL: 93 LX FiveO
they were doing a factory rating shootout.
engine: ford 427
factory rating: 425hp
factory torque: 420ft-lbs
actual rating: 634hp
actual torque: 590-something ft-lbs
the biggest under-rater though was the 426 hemi
factory rating: 425hp
actual rating: 820hp
dont know if i believe that but damn still impressive
there is a part 2 next week
they were doing a factory rating shootout.
engine: ford 427
factory rating: 425hp
factory torque: 420ft-lbs
actual rating: 634hp
actual torque: 590-something ft-lbs
the biggest under-rater though was the 426 hemi
factory rating: 425hp
actual rating: 820hp
dont know if i believe that but damn still impressive
there is a part 2 next week
#5
RE: just watched american muscle car
i saw that episode before. and i dont think they faked the numbers.
they used all stock parts on them and i believe they even tuned the engines to the stock settings.
but yeah i was blown away too when i saw the hemi numbers.
they used all stock parts on them and i believe they even tuned the engines to the stock settings.
but yeah i was blown away too when i saw the hemi numbers.
#6
RE: just watched american muscle car
I honestly think cars from the 60's were actually overrated instead of underrated.
What I want to know is why they were so slow for the power that they supposedly made. Was it just the suspension and tires they had 40 years ago?
What I want to know is why they were so slow for the power that they supposedly made. Was it just the suspension and tires they had 40 years ago?
#7
RE: just watched american muscle car
Black LX wrote: I honestly think cars from the 60's were actually overrated instead of underrated.
What I want to know is why they were so slow for the power that they supposedly made. Was it just the suspension and tires they had 40 years ago?
What I want to know is why they were so slow for the power that they supposedly made. Was it just the suspension and tires they had 40 years ago?
#8
RE: just watched american muscle car
they had what? 195-205 wide tires?[&:] hell I have trouble hooking up with 225 tires
for a prime example the AC/Shelby Cobra with the 427 and wide tires + lite weight was WAY ahead of its time
for a prime example the AC/Shelby Cobra with the 427 and wide tires + lite weight was WAY ahead of its time
#9
RE: just watched american muscle car
ORIGINAL: ctgreddy
i saw that episode before. and i dont think they faked the numbers.
they used all stock parts on them and i believe they even tuned the engines to the stock settings.
but yeah i was blown away too when i saw the hemi numbers.
i saw that episode before. and i dont think they faked the numbers.
they used all stock parts on them and i believe they even tuned the engines to the stock settings.
but yeah i was blown away too when i saw the hemi numbers.
#10
RE: just watched american muscle car
ORIGINAL: luizGT91
+1 and their heavy asses
+1 and their heavy asses
I'm currently restoring a 1965 K code fastback and I don't understand how it can be slower than an automatic GT convertible when it has more power, it's lighter, and it has better gears.
A K code with 4.11 gears does 0-60 in 6.9 seconds and runs the 1/4 in 15.5 seconds. One with 3.89s does 0-60 in 8.3 seconds and the 1/4 in 15.9 seconds. Mine came with 3.50s so just imagine how slow it will be.