Ping NoOp Patrick -- 50 Fastest Shootout

Hi Patrick.

Did you see the mention in the latest Hemmings Muscle Machines about
the Buickhorsepower.com effort to assemble as many cars as possible
from the 1984 "50 Fastest Muscle Cars" list, for a box stock shootout?
According to this webpage --
http://www.buickhorsepower.com/index...31&Itemi d=37
-- they're aiming for Wednesday and Thursday June 28 and June 29 9:00
AM until noon at Indianapolis Raceway Park. Spike TV's "MuscleCar
show" is covering it. (That's the new show on the former TNN, where
the bald guy Lou is always yelling, and the other guy Jared is always
spooning Bondo onto the project cars.)

According to HMM there will be tech inspections to check for
stock-ness, but of course cheating will be impossible to prevent. It
should be interesting, regardless.

Here's the "50 Fastest" list they're working off of:

http://www.buickhorsepower.com/image...50_fastest.pdf

wrote:
> Hi Patrick.

Hey, 180. Good to talk to you again!

> Did you see the mention in the latest Hemmings Muscle Machines about
> the Buickhorsepower.com effort to assemble as many cars as possible
> from the 1984 "50 Fastest Muscle Cars" list, for a box stock shootout?

No. Still trying to catch up on my reading since coming back from the
war.

> According to this webpage --

http://www.buickhorsepower.com/index...31&Itemi d=37
> -- they're aiming for Wednesday and Thursday June 28 and June 29 9:00
> AM until noon at Indianapolis Raceway Park. Spike TV's "MuscleCar
> show" is covering it. (That's the new show on the former TNN, where
> the bald guy Lou is always yelling, and the other guy Jared is always
> spooning Bondo onto the project cars.)

Thanks! I'll put a note on my calander.

> According to HMM there will be tech inspections to check for
> stock-ness, but of course cheating will be impossible to prevent. It
> should be interesting, regardless.

> Here's the "50 Fastest" list they're working off of:

> http://www.buickhorsepower.com/image...50_fastest.pdf

Except for the Cat 2+2 running 106 mph, this list looks
legit/believeable.

Patrick

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> wrote:
> > Hi Patrick.
>
> Hey, 180. Good to talk to you again!
>
> > Did you see the mention in the latest Hemmings Muscle Machines about
> > the Buickhorsepower.com effort to assemble as many cars as possible
> > from the 1984 "50 Fastest Muscle Cars" list, for a box stock shootout?
>
> No. Still trying to catch up on my reading since coming back from the
> war.
>
> > According to this webpage --
>
>
http://www.buickhorsepower.com/index...31&Itemi d=37
> > -- they're aiming for Wednesday and Thursday June 28 and June 29 9:00
> > AM until noon at Indianapolis Raceway Park. Spike TV's "MuscleCar
> > show" is covering it. (That's the new show on the former TNN, where
> > the bald guy Lou is always yelling, and the other guy Jared is always
> > spooning Bondo onto the project cars.)
>
> Thanks! I'll put a note on my calander.
>
> > According to HMM there will be tech inspections to check for
> > stock-ness, but of course cheating will be impossible to prevent. It
> > should be interesting, regardless.
>
> > Here's the "50 Fastest" list they're working off of:
>
> > http://www.buickhorsepower.com/image...50_fastest.pdf
>
> Except for the Cat 2+2 running 106 mph, this list looks
> legit/believeable.
>
> Patrick
>

Lots of cars were faster than the last ones they list. No 375 HP Nova, no
375 HP Camaro. All the 65 to 70 big HP Vetts could wipe out most of cars
listed from 4 down if they were ordered right. But they list a 72 low
compression automatic pig.

Al

On 9 May 2006 19:19:35 -0700, puked:

>Big Al wrote:
>
>> > Hey, 180. Good to talk to you again!
>
>> > > Did you see the mention in the latest Hemmings Muscle Machines about
>> > > the Buickhorsepower.com effort to assemble as many cars as possible
>> > > from the 1984 "50 Fastest Muscle Cars" list, for a box stock shootout?
>
>> > No. Still trying to catch up on my reading since coming back from the
>> > war.
>
>> > > According to this webpage --
>
>http://www.buickhorsepower.com/index...31&Itemi d=37
>> > > -- they're aiming for Wednesday and Thursday June 28 and June 29 9:00
>> > > AM until noon at Indianapolis Raceway Park. Spike TV's "MuscleCar
>> > > show" is covering it. (That's the new show on the former TNN, where
>> > > the bald guy Lou is always yelling, and the other guy Jared is always
>> > > spooning Bondo onto the project cars.)
>
>> > Thanks! I'll put a note on my calander.
>
>> > > According to HMM there will be tech inspections to check for
>> > > stock-ness, but of course cheating will be impossible to prevent. It
>> > > should be interesting, regardless.
>
>> > > Here's the "50 Fastest" list they're working off of:
>
>> > > http://www.buickhorsepower.com/image...50_fastest.pdf
>
>> > Except for the Cat 2+2 running 106 mph, this list looks
>> > legit/believeable.
>
>> Lots of cars were faster than the last ones they list. No 375 HP Nova, no
>> 375 HP Camaro. All the 65 to 70 big HP Vetts could wipe out most of cars
>> listed from 4 down if they were ordered right. But they list a 72 low
>> compression automatic pig.
>
>Al,
>
>Hemmings Muscle Machines, June 2006 issue, page 63, Ray Bohacz's
>editorial.
>
>"If we subtract the romance from the muscle car era, the truth is most
>if not all of the vehicles we hold in high esteem were performance dogs
>right out of the factory."

Most, but not all...

>I would only add "muscle car era 1', because right now we're living in
>the golden age of horsepower.

I agree.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> On 9 May 2006 19:19:35 -0700, puked:
>
> >Big Al wrote:

> >> > Except for the Cat 2+2 running 106 mph, this list looks
> >> > legit/believeable.

In the same issue of HMM, there's a feature on a '65 2+2. It mentions
this same March '65 Car & Driver test, and that they also got a sub-5
second 0-60. It says that the car was prepped by Royal Pontiac, so it
was probably far from stock. Royal also prepped the GTO that C & D
tested and found to be comparable to a Ferrari 250 GTO. Royal and Jim
Wangers (a Pontiac ad man and joint venturer with Royal on the Bobcat
GTO's) famously snuck a 421 into that GTO, in place of the stock 389.
I don't know what they could have done to the stock 421 in the '65 2 +
2 while retaining showroom new appearance and driveability, but to trap
a 3800 lb car at 106 mph they must have done quite a lot.

> >> Lots of cars were faster than the last ones they list. No 375 HP Nova, no
> >> 375 HP Camaro. All the 65 to 70 big HP Vetts could wipe out most of cars
> >> listed from 4 down if they were ordered right. But they list a 72 low
> >> compression automatic pig.

The writer in the Buickhorsepower.com page that I linked to in my
original post says that this 50 Fastest list originally appeared in Car
Review magazine in 1984, and was culled entirely from magazine road
tests from "in the day." So calling it the "50 Fastest" without an
asterisk explaining its origins is misleading. It should really be
called "The 50 Fastest Road Test Quarter Mile Times that One Ragazine
Writer Could Get His Hands On in 1984."

> >Hemmings Muscle Machines, June 2006 issue, page 63, Ray Bohacz's
> >editorial.
> >
> >"If we subtract the romance from the muscle car era, the truth is most
> >if not all of the vehicles we hold in high esteem were performance dogs
> >right out of the factory."
>
> Most, but not all...

First, Ray Bohacz is a cranky know-it-all who doesn't seem to like the
old heaps all that much. Second, the vehicles we hold in high esteem
are by definition the pavement buckling monsters, and these were no
"dogs." Yeah, I'll take the hit on the coulda been a contenduh Boss
429, and I don't even include all the 383 Road Runners, 396/325
Chevelles, or base model GTO's in the "high esteem" category. But to
call any 426 Hemi, 440-6v, 340-6v, LS6, 427/425, 427/435, 396/375,
327/375, 327/365, Z/28, Ram Air II, Ram Air IV, 455 Stage I, 428 Cobra
Jet, 427-8v, or Boss 351 -- much less the exotics like the Cobras, the
ZL-1s, L-88s, and SOHC 427s, or the factory Super Stock specials -- a
"performance dog" is just plain wrong.

> >I would only add "muscle car era 1', because right now we're living in
> >the golden age of horsepower.
>
> I agree.

There's a lot of apples and oranges going on in trying to compare the
two. Yes, 400 hp is now commonplace, in the spec sheets anyway, and
with the pricing of the GTO and the DC R/Ts it is just about working
class available. And you also get 20+ mpg, a 100,000 mile warranty,
excellent brakes and handling, AC, 10-speaker stereos, and leather
seating. Still, for pure cheap thrills, give me a slobbering tire
smoking edition of any of the cars from my "most esteemed" list, any
day. Their crudeness and the fact that they DON'T have all the modern
advantages is half the fun.

180 Out

Hey Patrick, speaking of Old School vs. New, remember this thread, from
March 2004?:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...ab40aee47916a1

Here's the current version of the "Fastest Acceleration Production
Cars" that you quoted from in a post in that March 2004 thread:
http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/fast.htm

The cutoff is 14.00 seconds.

Here are the 10 second cars:

Year Make Model Engine HP ET Trap speed Source

1968 Plymouth S/S Barracuda 426 Hemi V8 525 ** 10.5 130
MCR
1968 Dodge S/S Hemi Dart 426 Hemi V8 525 ** 10.5 129 MCR
1969 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray ZL1 427 V8 430 ** 10.6 132 MT
2006 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 8.0L W16 1001 10.8 140 CD

I should email the times for those '60's era "dogs" to Ray Bohacz. On
the other hand, the list is getting considerably top-heavy with late
models.

180 Out

Speaking of cars left off the list, by coincidence, on the subway this
morning I was reading Ro McGonegal's "Back in the Day" column in the
current (June '06) issue of Popular Hot Rodding. One subject is his
eye-witness account of a magazine drag test performed on a '69 Yenko
427/425 COPO Camaro for the July '69 issue of Super Stock & Drag
Illustrated. Here are some excerpts:

"Save for its intake manifold, the L72 engine was an all-iron big-block
that was factory rated at 425 hp. It included an 800-cfm Holley
carburetor and dual-point ignition, maintained a compression ratio of
11.0:1, and was commanded by a solid lifter flat tappet camshaft with
316 degrees duration and a 0.520-inch lift. A forged rotating assembly
underwrote the purpose. . . . [The L72 Camaro package] came through
with clunky cast-iron manifolds and tiny exhaust pipes routed for
convenience sake through that stubborn POS cross-flow muffler. When I
got on the gas hard, the thing hissed funky like a berserk vacuum
cleaner. [This is a description of Ro's own L72 '69 Camaro.] . . .

"According to the Yenko propaganda, their car had not been salved to
perform its best. The changes included clips on the front half of the
leaf springs to staunch windup when slicks were biting, and Doug
Thorley's exhaust panacea. . . . The engine in our gold/white-striped
test car had been subjected to the Minimal Diddle: the spark plugs were
the ones driven in; it had 16 degrees at the crank and 24 in the
distributor, but the carburetor, cylinder heads, and cam timing were
supposedly unmolested. . . . [Ro adds that Yenko prohibited flat
shifting for this test.]

"[O]n a dreary, moist day in April [a] raw breeze blew down the track
toward the starting line, but the light rain had ceased. Ambient was
in the 50s. [Yenko-supplied SS/E race driver Ed] Hedrick staged on the
line and made an exploratory pass: 14.02/102.50. You could almost see
the drool. Getting serious, [Yenko employee Dick] Williams pumped the
F70x15 Wide Ovals (not Polyglas) to 28 psi. Hedrick burned them in,
staged, drove the car out about 50 feet and then stood on it. Each
time he changed up, the tires squealed long and healthy. The L72 ran
12.80/108.56.

"For try three, [Williams removed the air cleaner and left the
baseplate that sealed to the hood, but kept the headers capped.
Hedrick changed his style, coming out at 1,500 rpm. The big motor liked
this and responded with a 12.59/108.17. Patience for the street tires
had worn as thin as their tread. We . . . screwed on the 8-inch wide
7.80-8.00x15 M&H slicks (at 9.5 psi). Williams stuck on [some 6"]
collector extensions. . . . Open headers and slick tires markedly
improved the Camaro's performance: 12.15/114.14. . . .

"We bumped the timing 2 degrees. Ed changed gears at 6,500 rpm and ran
a 12.10/114/60. And for that old (draft-dodger) college try, Hedrick
did the burnout ritual, staged, and everything clicked right for an
11.94 at 114.50. . . ."

OK, so an L72 Camaro was not common (between 500 and 1000 for '69).***
And slicks and open headers (or dual points for that matter) were not
factory equipment. Still, an 11.94 at 114.50 for a production line car
with open headers, an 8" slick, and a timing bump, are some awesome
numbers.

Here are some more specs on the L72, from
http://www.copo.com/L72-History.htm :

RPO L-72 427/425 engine, which includes a four bolt main block, 11:1
forged aluminum pistons, mechanical camshaft (.520in, 316 degree
duration intake, 302 degree exhaust) and forged steel crank. Big Valve
Heads 2.19in intake and 1.72 exhaust), A Holley 780 vacuum secondary
carburetor, an aluminum intake (163), chrome valve covers, and single
point aluminum distributor (499) were also included.

(I don't know what the "(163)" or "(400)" numbers mean.)

*** The L72 was a regular production order ("RPO") on the '66 Corvette
and the '66-'69 Impala, and a central office production order ("COPO")
on '68-'69 Camaros and about 50 '69 Chevelles.

Well I'm rambling here. Time to hit the "send" button.

180 Out

wrote:

> > >"If we subtract the romance from the muscle car era, the truth is most
> > >if not all of the vehicles we hold in high esteem were performance dogs
> > >right out of the factory."

> > Most, but not all...

> First, Ray Bohacz is a cranky know-it-all who doesn't seem to like the
> old heaps all that much.

I can only say the editor included/printed his article so the magazine
staff must be in agreement. We'll have to see if they receive flack
from readers next month.

> Second, the vehicles we hold in high esteem
> are by definition the pavement buckling monsters, and these were no
> "dogs." Yeah, I'll take the hit on the coulda been a contenduh Boss
> 429, and I don't even include all the 383 Road Runners, 396/325
> Chevelles, or base model GTO's in the "high esteem" category. But to
> call any 426 Hemi, 440-6v, 340-6v, LS6, 427/425, 427/435, 396/375,
> 327/375, 327/365, Z/28, Ram Air II, Ram Air IV, 455 Stage I, 428 Cobra
> Jet, 427-8v, or Boss 351 -- much less the exotics like the Cobras, the
> ZL-1s, L-88s, and SOHC 427s, or the factory Super Stock specials -- a
> "performance dog" is just plain wrong.

He wrote "right out of the factory". I gathered he meant unmolested
factory stock. In that state of tune, most, even the big dogs, ran 90
mph trap speeds. Very few ran much over 100. Some Hemi cars posted
103-105 and of course some of the Vettes ran as strong as the Hemis or
a little stronger. Of course the "exotics", factory drag cars, and
factory speacials like the ZL-1s were much faster. As you know
nowadays running 90s straight off the floor is no big deal. Even
posting low 100s isn't all that impressive. That's why my Cobra is in
need of about an additional 50 rear-wheel horsepower... it's a dog now.


> > >I would only add "muscle car era 1', because right now we're living in
> > >the golden age of horsepower.

> > I agree.

> There's a lot of apples and oranges going on in trying to compare the
> two. Yes, 400 hp is now commonplace, in the spec sheets anyway, and
> with the pricing of the GTO and the DC R/Ts it is just about working
> class available. And you also get 20+ mpg, a 100,000 mile warranty,
> excellent brakes and handling, AC, 10-speaker stereos, and leather
> seating. Still, for pure cheap thrills, give me a slobbering tire
> smoking edition of any of the cars from my "most esteemed" list, any
> day. Their crudeness and the fact that they DON'T have all the modern
> advantages is half the fun.

Here's a thought: 20 years ago, a fuel injected 5-oh was considered
"refined." And 20 years from now I'm sure a 2006 performance car will
be considered "crude."

Patrick

wrote:
> Speaking of cars left off the list, by coincidence, on the subway this
> morning I was reading Ro McGonegal's "Back in the Day" column in the
> current (June '06) issue of Popular Hot Rodding. One subject is his
> eye-witness account of a magazine drag test performed on a '69 Yenko
> 427/425 COPO Camaro for the July '69 issue of Super Stock & Drag
> Illustrated. Here are some excerpts:

> "Save for its intake manifold, the L72 engine was an all-iron big-block
> that was factory rated at 425 hp. It included an 800-cfm Holley
> carburetor and dual-point ignition, maintained a compression ratio of
> 11.0:1, and was commanded by a solid lifter flat tappet camshaft with
> 316 degrees duration and a 0.520-inch lift. A forged rotating assembly
> underwrote the purpose. . . . [The L72 Camaro package] came through
> with clunky cast-iron manifolds and tiny exhaust pipes routed for
> convenience sake through that stubborn POS cross-flow muffler. When I
> got on the gas hard, the thing hissed funky like a berserk vacuum
> cleaner. [This is a description of Ro's own L72 '69 Camaro.] . . .

> "According to the Yenko propaganda, their car had not been salved to
> perform its best. The changes included clips on the front half of the
> leaf springs to staunch windup when slicks were biting, and Doug
> Thorley's exhaust panacea. . . . The engine in our gold/white-striped
> test car had been subjected to the Minimal Diddle: the spark plugs were
> the ones driven in; it had 16 degrees at the crank and 24 in the
> distributor, but the carburetor, cylinder heads, and cam timing were
> supposedly unmolested. . . . [Ro adds that Yenko prohibited flat
> shifting for this test.]

> "[O]n a dreary, moist day in April [a] raw breeze blew down the track
> toward the starting line, but the light rain had ceased. Ambient was
> in the 50s. [Yenko-supplied SS/E race driver Ed] Hedrick staged on the
> line and made an exploratory pass: 14.02/102.50. You could almost see
> the drool. Getting serious, [Yenko employee Dick] Williams pumped the
> F70x15 Wide Ovals (not Polyglas) to 28 psi. Hedrick burned them in,
> staged, drove the car out about 50 feet and then stood on it. Each
> time he changed up, the tires squealed long and healthy. The L72 ran
> 12.80/108.56.

> "For try three, [Williams removed the air cleaner and left the
> baseplate that sealed to the hood, but kept the headers capped.
> Hedrick changed his style, coming out at 1,500 rpm. The big motor liked
> this and responded with a 12.59/108.17. Patience for the street tires
> had worn as thin as their tread. We . . . screwed on the 8-inch wide
> 7.80-8.00x15 M&H slicks (at 9.5 psi). Williams stuck on [some 6"]
> collector extensions. . . . Open headers and slick tires markedly
> improved the Camaro's performance: 12.15/114.14. . . .

> "We bumped the timing 2 degrees. Ed changed gears at 6,500 rpm and ran
> a 12.10/114/60. And for that old (draft-dodger) college try, Hedrick
> did the burnout ritual, staged, and everything clicked right for an
> 11.94 at 114.50. . . ."

> OK, so an L72 Camaro was not common (between 500 and 1000 for '69).***
> And slicks and open headers (or dual points for that matter) were not
> factory equipment. Still, an 11.94 at 114.50 for a production line car
> with open headers, an 8" slick, and a timing bump, are some awesome
> numbers.

I won't try to tell you those numbers are dog-like. However, I'll will
use them to reiterate my claim that we are now living in the golden age
of horsepower. Cases in point: LS1 twins ran 108-112 mph dead stock.
GM High Tech magazine performance took a 6-speed Camaro off the
showroom floor and ran 12.80s at around 112; it was unmolested and
running street tires. And the Terminators run 110-113 mph traps dead
stock. Even the new 3-valve GT Mustangs with just a chip and some
weight tossed out have run 108. And all of them are so tame your
Grandma could drive them any of them to church on Sunday.

Patrick