I really miss the true Full sized cars

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
A full size car with a turbo 4 banger?

Not in my garage...


I agree. I saw a full size Cadillac sedan that said 2.0 on the back. Didn't the 80's era Ford Escorts have 2.0 4-bangers? I couldn't imagine that tiny engine lasting very long pushing a huge sedan around.
 
Originally Posted By: TFB1
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
The only car I had that fitted into this category was the '65 Mercury Park Lane, with the rear power window (the "Breezeway" option) so that, if you opened all the windows, including the triangular vent windows, you could cruise on a warm day without the A/C. But it had good air, a 300 hp Thunderbird engine, and was easy to work on -- and got about 15 mpg on the highway in a time of $1.10/gal. gas.

No, it wasn't as reliable or safe as modern cars. But a fun ride nevertheless.

Before the 1972 models, almost no vehicle had the rated HP, that 300 Hp 390 T-Bird engine may have had 225, and that's on a good day(I had same in a '64 Galaxie, two in fact)... The 455 Buick GS did make approx their rating of 360, left the 454 Chevy boys wondering how a heavier vehicle with less HP was mopping up on their 450Hp LS6 at the drag strips(Chevy was lying)..


Yes...but not the way you think. Actual dyno tests of LS6 engines have shown they made 450HP easily...and usually 500+.

Quote:
Starting 1972 Fed says HP will be rated as installed in vehicle, cork screw exhaust and all... Along with reducing compression and smog tuning, that's why most of the '70s models appear to have such dismal HP ratings, but in the real world the '72 may have had 10% less HP than the earlier vehicles... With headers(mfgr always rated with headers or at least open exhaust), a re-curve of distributor and carb rejet, there was 300Hp in those T-Bird 390, it just couldn't get out...


Correction factor also changed (that dropped everything ~5%). Also, GM dropped compression ratios about two full points across the board for 1971.
 
Originally Posted By: HangFire
On top of bogus OEM HP claims, Car and Driver admitted to bogus 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Theirs were always a hair faster than Road & Track. There was a lot of delusion going on.


Many press cars were ringers. I recall a magazine writer buying a former press-fleet Firebird. A few years later, he discovered it had ported heads, a recurved distributor, and an aftermarket cam. GTO's having the 389 replaced with a 421 weren't that unusual.
 
Originally Posted By: TFB1

Before the 1972 models, almost no vehicle had the rated HP, that 300 Hp 390 T-Bird engine may have had 225, and that's on a good day(I had same in a '64 Galaxie, two in fact)... The 455 Buick GS did make approx their rating of 360, left the 454 Chevy boys wondering how a heavier vehicle with less HP was mopping up on their 450Hp LS6 at the drag strips(Chevy was lying)..

Starting 1972 Fed says HP will be rated as installed in vehicle, cork screw exhaust and all... Along with reducing compression and smog tuning, that's why most of the '70s models appear to have such dismal HP ratings, but in the real world the '72 may have had 10% less HP than the earlier vehicles... With headers(mfgr always rated with headers or at least open exhaust), a re-curve of distributor and carb rejet, there was 300Hp in those T-Bird 390, it just couldn't get out...

Another example is the 302 in my '72 Comet... the '71 was rated 210Hp, '72 plummeted to 140Hp, again mostly because of the soda straw exhaust system that was same both years...



Yes, cars really started to suck around 1972.
frown.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: HangFire
On top of bogus OEM HP claims, Car and Driver admitted to bogus 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Theirs were always a hair faster than Road & Track. There was a lot of delusion going on.


Many press cars were ringers. I recall a magazine writer buying a former press-fleet Firebird. A few years later, he discovered it had ported heads, a recurved distributor, and an aftermarket cam. GTO's having the 389 replaced with a 421 weren't that unusual.

John DeLorean was no doubt the sly one...

There was at least one case the testers(can't remember which mag) received a GTO with engine ID stamping on block that was altered... They tested it and it apparently ran really good times but would not publish the numbers... A couple years prior mags were patting Pontiac on the back for sending "properly prepared cars"..
 
Originally Posted By: Turk
Originally Posted By: TFB1

Before the 1972 models, almost no vehicle had the rated HP, that 300 Hp 390 T-Bird engine may have had 225, and that's on a good day(I had same in a '64 Galaxie, two in fact)... The 455 Buick GS did make approx their rating of 360, left the 454 Chevy boys wondering how a heavier vehicle with less HP was mopping up on their 450Hp LS6 at the drag strips(Chevy was lying)..

Starting 1972 Fed says HP will be rated as installed in vehicle, cork screw exhaust and all... Along with reducing compression and smog tuning, that's why most of the '70s models appear to have such dismal HP ratings, but in the real world the '72 may have had 10% less HP than the earlier vehicles... With headers(mfgr always rated with headers or at least open exhaust), a re-curve of distributor and carb rejet, there was 300Hp in those T-Bird 390, it just couldn't get out...

Another example is the 302 in my '72 Comet... the '71 was rated 210Hp, '72 plummeted to 140Hp, again mostly because of the soda straw exhaust system that was same both years...



Yes, cars really started to suck around 1972.
frown.gif



No, not really. Power was respectable for many (except GM) to 1974. (Offhand, Chrysler's 1971 and 1972 engines were identical.)
 
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: HangFire
On top of bogus OEM HP claims, Car and Driver admitted to bogus 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Theirs were always a hair faster than Road & Track. There was a lot of delusion going on.


Many press cars were ringers. I recall a magazine writer buying a former press-fleet Firebird. A few years later, he discovered it had ported heads, a recurved distributor, and an aftermarket cam. GTO's having the 389 replaced with a 421 weren't that unusual.


This was also documented in Car and Driver during their infamous test of the Pontiac GTO versus the Ferrarri GTO. John DeLorean was known to send out tuned cars.

I think it was much more the norm than we were led to believe...
 
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

Yes...but not the way you think. Actual dyno tests of LS6 engines have shown they made 450HP easily...and usually 500+.

Correction factor also changed (that dropped everything ~5%). Also, GM dropped compression ratios about two full points across the board for 1971.


Having owned a real LS6 Chevelle for several years as a kid I can promise you it was very powerful. Mine had well over 200 passes on it and never broke into the the twelves even with mods.

My much heavier Chrysler easily demolishes it with full luxury and only 6.1 litres. Cars today are not even comparable to the "good ole daze". They are light years better...
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
A full size car with a turbo 4 banger?

Not in my garage...


I agree. I saw a full size Cadillac sedan that said 2.0 on the back.


Was it a Cimarron?
 
Originally Posted By: css9450
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
A full size car with a turbo 4 banger?

Not in my garage...


I agree. I saw a full size Cadillac sedan that said 2.0 on the back.


Was it a Cimarron?


2.0T is the base engine in a CTS...but also the base engine in a BMW 5 series.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Comfortable Seats
2 3
Replies
43
Views
4K
dadto2
S
I love the snow but ... Kinda done with it
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
2K
Ranger83
wings&wheels
2024 Toyota Land Cruiser 1958 5k Mile Review
2 3
Replies
42
Views
7K
4WD
edyvw
5,000 miles review of new to me 2018 Toyota Sequoia
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
edyvw
R
My 10,000 mile review of the 2024 Tahoe
2
Replies
26
Views
8K
redhat
Back
Top Bottom