I still love the GTO's---you know the real ones.
When you run, what you brung,,,,,
- Thread starter CourierDriver
- Start date
- Status
By today's standards, they could time that race with a calendar.,,,
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
There are now many SUV's faster than those old girls.
Those old cars look great. Doing it in style.
Originally Posted By: BigCahuna
By today's standards, they could time that race with a calendar.,,,
But those old 4,000 lb behemoths are running on basically stock drive-train and skinny 15" repro (red line) tires specced from the 1960's. Still, they could more than give 95% of today's SUV's a run for their money with more modern improvements such as stickier tires. I would think that a bone stock 1970 Dodge Charger with well built 426 race hemi, modern tires, and 4.10 gears could blow the doors off most of the SUV's out there in a 1/4 mile. The other 1-5% that can't be beat are the 400-600 hp specialized performance cars that are really just Vettes or Porsche's in SUV styling. Just thinly disguised race cars.
By today's standards, they could time that race with a calendar.,,,
But those old 4,000 lb behemoths are running on basically stock drive-train and skinny 15" repro (red line) tires specced from the 1960's. Still, they could more than give 95% of today's SUV's a run for their money with more modern improvements such as stickier tires. I would think that a bone stock 1970 Dodge Charger with well built 426 race hemi, modern tires, and 4.10 gears could blow the doors off most of the SUV's out there in a 1/4 mile. The other 1-5% that can't be beat are the 400-600 hp specialized performance cars that are really just Vettes or Porsche's in SUV styling. Just thinly disguised race cars.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Originally Posted By: BigCahuna
By today's standards, they could time that race with a calendar.,,,
But those old 4,000 lb behemoths are running on basically stock drive-train and skinny small repro tires specced from the 1960's. They could more than give today's SUV's a run for their money with more modern improvements. I would think that a bone stock 1970 Dodge Charger with well built 426 race hemi and 4.10 gears could blow the doors off 99% of the SUV's out there.
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
Generally only the big engined performance-oriented ones run 13's and below. The BMW X6 X-Drive50i runs 12's for example. These old girls would still destroy a Honda Pilot, Yukon, Durango....etc.
Originally Posted By: BigCahuna
By today's standards, they could time that race with a calendar.,,,
But those old 4,000 lb behemoths are running on basically stock drive-train and skinny small repro tires specced from the 1960's. They could more than give today's SUV's a run for their money with more modern improvements. I would think that a bone stock 1970 Dodge Charger with well built 426 race hemi and 4.10 gears could blow the doors off 99% of the SUV's out there.
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
,Generally only the big engined ones that run 13's and below. The BMW X6 X-Drive50i runs 12's for example. These old girls would still destroy a Honda Pilot, Yukon, Durango....etc.
100 MPH is fine for a 440ci/375 gross hp 1970 Charger on factory red line tires which are visible in the video. Now beef that up by 50 hp or so for a stock hemi and add some modern tires. It's trap would be several mph better. The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
Your 1987 Stang is a 3100 lb car. That's light compared to a 3900 lb. 1970 Hemi Charger. Huge weight differential. That's like a Vette vs. an SUV today. And factor in the wind resistance with that huge Dodge vs. the tinier Fox body mustang. Yeah, the SRT Cherokee is one of those newer beasts that's essentially a sports car. I came close to buying a 1993 5.0 mustang 5 speed. But I couldn't get used to that sensitive clutch....stalled on my way too often and I have no problem with the Tremec T56's at that time. Those 5.0 Mustangs were potent little rockets at that time. When the LT1 Pontiac/Chevys came out with 275 hp in 1993 it was a new ball game.
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
100 MPH is fine for a 440ci/375 gross hp 1970 Charger on factory red line tires which are visible in the video. Now beef that up by 50 hp or so for a stock hemi and add some modern tires. It's trap would be several mph better. The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
Your 1987 Stang is a 3100 lb car. That's light compared to a 3900 lb. 1970 Hemi Charger. Huge weight differential. That's like a Vette vs. an SUV today. And factor in the wind resistance with that huge Dodge vs. the tinier Fox body mustang. Yeah, the SRT Cherokee is one of those newer beasts that's essentially a sports car. I came close to buying a 1993 5.0 mustang 5 speed. But I couldn't get used to that sensitive clutch....stalled on my way too often and I have no problem with the Tremec T56's at that time. Those 5.0 Mustangs were potent little rockets at that time. When the LT1 Pontiac/Chevys came out with 275 hp in 1993 it was a new ball game.
Don't forget gear ratios either...today's automatics are maybe 3.54 1st gear, where the Charger (dunno about the GTO) is 3:1. Add to that 6 or more gears and that 'splains the difference. Put a modern 6 or 8 speed transmission in either of those old muscle cars and the differences between then and now go away. Lots of small improvements over the years.
I wonder how modified these cars and engines are, and if the tires are stock reproductions or sticky tires made to look factory. They aren't doing water burnouts, but they also don't slip-n-slide all the way down the track. You can hear a little tire squeal in some of the videos, though.
Here's a pair that would be the 1969 version of today's king of the hill factory hotrods.
Since somebody mentioned Hemis:
Here's a pair that would be the 1969 version of today's king of the hill factory hotrods.
Since somebody mentioned Hemis:
That's brave to race those cars like that. Thast camaro must be half a million bucks.
Yes , there are a lot of rice burners that perform well, but its the sound of that time zone,,,hard to duplicate it with todays rides . Like an Harley,,,well, that was my yesterday,,,has anyone been to a a car show with 1964 Renaults lately,,, but I bet you been to a 60s muscle car show,,,..
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
,Generally only the big engined ones that run 13's and below. The BMW X6 X-Drive50i runs 12's for example. These old girls would still destroy a Honda Pilot, Yukon, Durango....etc.
100 MPH is fine for a 440ci/375 gross hp 1970 Charger on factory red line tires which are visible in the video.
I'm not saying it is bad, just saying a 100Mph trap, by today's standards, isn't great. In my experience, tires don't generally affect trap, they affect ET. Hence my comment about the ET being quite good. I found I could blow the tires off and run an awful ET or hook solid and run a great ET but the trap was generally the same.
Quote:
Now beef that up by 50 hp or so for a stock hemi and add some modern tires. It's trap would be several mph better. The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too.
Not bad at all for that era for sure
Quote:
A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
It's about on-par with that gen F-body IIRC. They trapped 105-108Mph range usually, and ran low 13's. I know there were guys that got them into the 12's.
Quote:
Your 1987 Stang is a 3100 lb car. That's light compared to a 3900 lb. 1970 Hemi Charger. Huge weight differential. That's like a Vette vs. an SUV today. And factor in the wind resistance with that huge Dodge vs. the tinier Fox body mustang.
Actually, it was more around 3,300-3,400lbs, that's why I specifically stated GT T-top, as it was a hatchback with a heavier glass roof, spare tire and the body kit. The verts could weigh up to 3,700 IIRC. But yes, it was a few hundred lbs lighter. Curb weight for the old HEMI seems to be 3,880lbs FWIW.
Quote:
Yeah, the SRT Cherokee is one of those newer beasts that's essentially a sports car. I came close to buying a 1993 5.0 mustang 5 speed. But I couldn't get used to that sensitive clutch....stalled on my way too often and I have no problem with the Tremec T56's at that time. Those 5.0 Mustangs were potent little rockets at that time. When the LT1 Pontiac/Chevys came out with 275 hp in 1993 it was a new ball game.
Sure was! I had a ton of fun with the old foxes, have helped built a number of them too. We used to be quite the group, helping each other with our builds, but that sort of petered out once folks had kids and priorities changed.
My last two cars were both faster than my foxbody and were all stock (E39 M5, 2014 Charger SRT8), and the M5, with the 6spd, could certainly get squirrely, but it always felt like the fox was trying to kill you and that's what made it different, LOL
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
100Mph trap speeds aren't great though. The ET's were actually pretty good if they were running factory tires. My 225HP '87 Mustang was trapping around the 100Mph mark, and being a GT T-Top it was not much lighter than these old beasts.
The SUV comment was sort of tongue-in-cheek because I just bought an SRT Cherokee, LOL
100 MPH is fine for a 440ci/375 gross hp 1970 Charger on factory red line tires which are visible in the video.
I'm not saying it is bad, just saying a 100Mph trap, by today's standards, isn't great. In my experience, tires don't generally affect trap, they affect ET. Hence my comment about the ET being quite good. I found I could blow the tires off and run an awful ET or hook solid and run a great ET but the trap was generally the same.
Quote:
Now beef that up by 50 hp or so for a stock hemi and add some modern tires. It's trap would be several mph better. The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too.
Not bad at all for that era for sure
Quote:
A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
It's about on-par with that gen F-body IIRC. They trapped 105-108Mph range usually, and ran low 13's. I know there were guys that got them into the 12's.
Quote:
Your 1987 Stang is a 3100 lb car. That's light compared to a 3900 lb. 1970 Hemi Charger. Huge weight differential. That's like a Vette vs. an SUV today. And factor in the wind resistance with that huge Dodge vs. the tinier Fox body mustang.
Actually, it was more around 3,300-3,400lbs, that's why I specifically stated GT T-top, as it was a hatchback with a heavier glass roof, spare tire and the body kit. The verts could weigh up to 3,700 IIRC. But yes, it was a few hundred lbs lighter. Curb weight for the old HEMI seems to be 3,880lbs FWIW.
Quote:
Yeah, the SRT Cherokee is one of those newer beasts that's essentially a sports car. I came close to buying a 1993 5.0 mustang 5 speed. But I couldn't get used to that sensitive clutch....stalled on my way too often and I have no problem with the Tremec T56's at that time. Those 5.0 Mustangs were potent little rockets at that time. When the LT1 Pontiac/Chevys came out with 275 hp in 1993 it was a new ball game.
Sure was! I had a ton of fun with the old foxes, have helped built a number of them too. We used to be quite the group, helping each other with our builds, but that sort of petered out once folks had kids and priorities changed.
My last two cars were both faster than my foxbody and were all stock (E39 M5, 2014 Charger SRT8), and the M5, with the 6spd, could certainly get squirrely, but it always felt like the fox was trying to kill you and that's what made it different, LOL
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Don't forget gear ratios either...today's automatics are maybe 3.54 1st gear, where the Charger (dunno about the GTO) is 3:1. Add to that 6 or more gears and that 'splains the difference. Put a modern 6 or 8 speed transmission in either of those old muscle cars and the differences between then and now go away. Lots of small improvements over the years.
Yes, this is a huge deal. You're able to keep the engine in its sweet spot for more seconds. Going to a 456 gear with 700r4 made my dog 75 vette into an animal. It hangs with the new cars off,the line. Perfect for redlight to redlight. I run about the same highway revs it did with 308 gear and t400.
Don't forget gear ratios either...today's automatics are maybe 3.54 1st gear, where the Charger (dunno about the GTO) is 3:1. Add to that 6 or more gears and that 'splains the difference. Put a modern 6 or 8 speed transmission in either of those old muscle cars and the differences between then and now go away. Lots of small improvements over the years.
Yes, this is a huge deal. You're able to keep the engine in its sweet spot for more seconds. Going to a 456 gear with 700r4 made my dog 75 vette into an animal. It hangs with the new cars off,the line. Perfect for redlight to redlight. I run about the same highway revs it did with 308 gear and t400.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Don't forget gear ratios either...today's automatics are maybe 3.54 1st gear, where the Charger (dunno about the GTO) is 3:1. Add to that 6 or more gears and that 'splains the difference. Put a modern 6 or 8 speed transmission in either of those old muscle cars and the differences between then and now go away. Lots of small improvements over the years.
Yes, this is a huge deal. You're able to keep the engine in its sweet spot for more seconds. Going to a 456 gear with 700r4 made my dog 75 vette into an animal. It hangs with the new cars off,the line. Perfect for redlight to redlight. I run about the same highway revs it did with 308 gear and t400.
Yup, it certainly makes a difference. Going from the 5spd to the 8spd, the engine is able to stay where it needs to be far better. I never thought I'd be a fan of that many gears, but actually driving it, wow.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Don't forget gear ratios either...today's automatics are maybe 3.54 1st gear, where the Charger (dunno about the GTO) is 3:1. Add to that 6 or more gears and that 'splains the difference. Put a modern 6 or 8 speed transmission in either of those old muscle cars and the differences between then and now go away. Lots of small improvements over the years.
Yes, this is a huge deal. You're able to keep the engine in its sweet spot for more seconds. Going to a 456 gear with 700r4 made my dog 75 vette into an animal. It hangs with the new cars off,the line. Perfect for redlight to redlight. I run about the same highway revs it did with 308 gear and t400.
Yup, it certainly makes a difference. Going from the 5spd to the 8spd, the engine is able to stay where it needs to be far better. I never thought I'd be a fan of that many gears, but actually driving it, wow.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2025
In 2001 when the F-body got the LS6 intake they could trap 110.
When I had my 2001 Z28 bone stock Goodyear Eagle GS-Cs I ran 12.95 at 109.02 mph then 12.95 at 109.4 back to back.
I know I am not the only person to do that in a LS1 F-body.
My 01 Z28 scaled out with a full tank of gas was 3680.
infact...
This was an Article from Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords.
They were not the only Magazine to do it.
When I had my 2001 Z28 bone stock Goodyear Eagle GS-Cs I ran 12.95 at 109.02 mph then 12.95 at 109.4 back to back.
I know I am not the only person to do that in a LS1 F-body.
My 01 Z28 scaled out with a full tank of gas was 3680.
infact...
This was an Article from Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords.
They were not the only Magazine to do it.
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
I stand corrected thanks to LS1Mike. Some cars apparently did get down there. And if any of them did, an SLP 3" performance exhaust with Blackwing air lid certainly would help for an extra 20 hp or so...especially if you ordered your SS as the lighter hardtop. But, I'm trying to stick with 100% stock items from the factory or SLP.
The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
I stand corrected thanks to LS1Mike. Some cars apparently did get down there. And if any of them did, an SLP 3" performance exhaust with Blackwing air lid certainly would help for an extra 20 hp or so...especially if you ordered your SS as the lighter hardtop. But, I'm trying to stick with 100% stock items from the factory or SLP.
Patman
Staff member
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
I had a 98 Formula 6 speed and in stock trim it ran 13.08 at 106 mph and with a few simple mods (4.10 gears, drag radials, MTI airbox, etc.) it ran 12.68 at 111 mph. I had many many friends with LS1 f-bodies that ran very low 13s right out of the box and a couple of real good ones that squeaked into the 12s stock too.
The best I can find for a stock Mopar of that era was a 1970 hemi Cuda with 3.55's running a 13.10 at 107 mph. Not bad for ancient technology. Probably tweaked too. A stock 2002 Trans AM WS6 LS1 at 325 hp couldn't do that.
I had a 98 Formula 6 speed and in stock trim it ran 13.08 at 106 mph and with a few simple mods (4.10 gears, drag radials, MTI airbox, etc.) it ran 12.68 at 111 mph. I had many many friends with LS1 f-bodies that ran very low 13s right out of the box and a couple of real good ones that squeaked into the 12s stock too.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2025
Yeah the 2001 and up cars hit 12's more frequently because they all came with the LS6 intake from the factory.
I think a slightly different Cam as well.
I remember I dynoed my 01 Z28 with 151 miles and paper tags on it. It put down 318 RWHP. More than what was advertised at the crank. Ha.
Stock gears in any of the 6 speed cars were 3.42s. blah.
Those are 6 speed cars too. They were just faster than the 4 speed auto. Not the case anymore. Automatics are pretty slick now.
Best cars to do it in were normal Trans Am/Z-28 cars. They were a bit lighter than their SS/WS6 counterparts.
To be honest it never really made much of a difference. My WS6 was the slowest one for me out of the box. 13.20's at 107
My 98 Z-28 and my 01 Z-28 trapped higher and got down the 1320 quicker.
I remember I dynoed my 01 Z28 with 151 miles and paper tags on it. It put down 318 RWHP. More than what was advertised at the crank. Ha.
Stock gears in any of the 6 speed cars were 3.42s. blah.
Those are 6 speed cars too. They were just faster than the 4 speed auto. Not the case anymore. Automatics are pretty slick now.
Best cars to do it in were normal Trans Am/Z-28 cars. They were a bit lighter than their SS/WS6 counterparts.
To be honest it never really made much of a difference. My WS6 was the slowest one for me out of the box. 13.20's at 107
My 98 Z-28 and my 01 Z-28 trapped higher and got down the 1320 quicker.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked