'24 Toyota GR86 vs '69 Camaro

Are you comparing a current (old man) evaluation of the Toyota to rose tinted glasses memories of the Camaro?

Are we thinking of how it ran back in the day on 89 octane leaded fuel, riding on polyglas bias ply tires?

Is the "better ride" on a 50 year younger spine?

I bet the Toyota holds the road a lot better.
Yes to all of the above..lol
 
71 camaro, butt ugly cars after 69. Everyone then had to detune for emissions. Its strange all this crazy now performance is allowed, they sure wanted it gone in the early 70's. The GR86 looks nice, they just need a better engine, and less RTV in it. 🤣 🤣 😍
 
That a modern ricer could beat a car from fifty+ years ago is not surprising.
The old cars that were regarded as quick back in the day are rarely in a league with even four cylinder family sedans of today.
Compare that Camaro to a car of fifty years before it and it would be astoundingly better in more ways of greater magnitude than the Corolla is as compared to a '67 Camaro.
Things do progress over time, after all.
Exactly. And the Toyota isn’t exactly a big car.
 
Here are some 0-60 times of early Camaro. Generally, any modern car having close to 300 SAE net horsepower can beat them.

View attachment 219593
😆 This chart...a 69 ZL1 running 13.2's? Must be on the F-70-14's it came with. Put slicks on it and free up the exhaust, and it was a 10 second car all day long.
Yea, today's cars are safer, more comfortable, get better mpg's and maybe faster, but given the choice of a nice early Camaro or any Toyota, I'd take the Camaro.
 
Check this out, some guy money shifts his brand new GR Corolla and blows the engine. Trys for warranty and denied. Toyota wants $42k to fix the engine. Rebuild a SBC for a Camaro at home or buy a SBC for a tenth of that.

 
😆 This chart...a 69 ZL1 running 13.2's? Must be on the F-70-14's it came with. Put slicks on it and free up the exhaust, and it was a 10 second car all day long.
Yea, today's cars are safer, more comfortable, get better mpg's and maybe faster, but given the choice of a nice early Camaro or any Toyota, I'd take the Camaro.
I don’t think so. Here is an excerpt from a road test in the day.

599CAD64-7954-4785-BCFA-948E721F35DA.jpeg
 
What is the problem with this engine?
RTV blocking the pick up screen, oil starvation under hard cornering, Toyota refusing replacements while under warranty for “abuse” despite advertising AND SELLING THE CAR WITH A FRIGGIN TRACK DAY(!!!!!) but if it’s just going to be a daily driver you’ll likely be fine.
 
Check this out, some guy money shifts his brand new GR Corolla and blows the engine. Trys for warranty and denied. Toyota wants $42k to fix the engine. Rebuild a SBC for a Camaro at home or buy a SBC for a tenth of that.

Week ill designed junk, no one in love with toyota wants to hear that they like everyone else manufacturing automotive engines nowadays, learned how not to do the job correctly. To save costs is number 1, to have them not last is number 2. If something lasts too long how can you make more $?
 
As I've mentioned before, I have a 1991 magazine that is a compilation of road tests from the old Hi-Performance Cars magazine. The fastest 1/4 mile time was a 12.5 posted by Joe Oldham's 1969 Motion Performance big block Camaro- with 4.10 gears, uncapped headers and slicks. Aside from that car most of the others put up 1/4 mile ETs in the 13.5-14.5 second range. Those times are definitely on the slow side of average for performance cars these days. Even my wife's X1 can run the quarter in 14.6 sec @ 95 mph(a bit faster than my 1988 M6 when it was stock). My 2007 Mazdaspeed 3 could run the quarter in the low 14 second range and trap 100 mph all day long- and that's with a 2.3 liter turbo that averaged 26+ mpg over the 8 years and 158,000 miles I had it. My M235i returned similar fuel economy but ran the 1/4 mile in 12.9 seconds @ 109 mph. The C43 does it in 12.6 seconds @ 111 mph. A new X3 M40i runs the 1/4-Mile in 12.8 seconds @ 107 mph (all times taken from Car and Driver).

A few years ago I took my friend's Mercedes-AMG E63 to Ohio Valley Raceway's 1/8 mile strip. My fastest run was an 8.12 at 89 mph. I easily beat a built 1970 Buick GSX Stage I running slicks. A few years later I took my M235i to Ohio Valley and it ran an 8.59; with no limited slip I had a major problem with wheelspin. In the late '70s -when I hit the strip on a regular basis- there were very few cars that would run in the low eights, and those that did were usually seriously modified. I'm taking the C43 to the 1/8 strip in a few weeks; a full report will be forthcoming.
I just ordered a Tesla M3P which is a 10 second car. So yeah, cars have come a long way.
 
...The reason it only ran in the 11's in that test is because they still couldn't get it to hook with the slicks they were using...Find the Hot Rod mag article.
Sorry. Their slicks were’t good enough? You need at lot more than 500 HP to get into a 10 sec ET. Tell you what. You bring out a ZL1 road test, using the slicks you think are appropriate, and show us a 10 sec ET. :)
 
Sorry. Their slicks were’t good enough? You need at lot more than 500 HP to get into a 10 sec ET. Tell you what. You bring out a ZL1 road test, using the slicks you think are appropriate, and show us a 10 sec ET. :)
When set up for drag racing, they ran that test with 6 1/2" slicks. They had a lot more than 500 horsepower and weighed less than 3500lbs. There's a pic in this article of what the car looks like with slicks that will hook.
Screenshot_20240518_085551_Chrome.jpg
 
When set up for drag racing, they ran that test with 6 1/2" slicks. They had a lot more than 500 horsepower and weighed less than 3500lbs. There's a pic in this article of what the car looks like with slicks that will hook.
View attachment 219933
You are taking about a race car. I’m talking about a 69 Camaro with an ZL-1. “ Put slicks on it and open the exhaust and it was a 10 second car all day long. “Nope. The rest is just semantics. None of the other cars could get into the 10’s. Over and out.
 
Last edited:
You are taking about a race car. I’m talking about a 69 Camaro with an ZL-1. “ Put slicks on it and open the exhaust and it was a 10 second car all day long. “Nope. The rest is just semantics. None of the other cars could get into the 10’s. Over and out.
Ok, so a 3200lb car with 575 hp won't be able to run 10's...you win.
 
I take responsibility. It has to do with remembering the great days of muscle cars, but finding out it was a bit of wishful thinking on our part. I drew the line on “10 second runs with stock muscle cars”. With that I will update one piece of info. A 3500 lb car pretty much needs 700 HP to pull off a 10.0. However, the drag strip jargon is that running 10’s can mean 10.99, but just the same, some mods were usually made when any muscle car was taken down to the strip. Thanks for the original posting!
 
Back
Top