That's a very vague definition. Not all V8 powered cars made during those years were in the muscle car class.
It was meant to be vauge so it could be built upon.
AMXs are not pony cars. They only have two seats.
The SCCA differentiated by specifying a four place street type sports sedan could be used in Trans Am. This is why it became the showcase for the pony car wars.
I'm with 7T1, if it looks good and goes fast, who cares...
It was meant to be vauge so it could be built upon.
AMXs are not pony cars. They only have two seats.
The SCCA differentiated by specifying a four place street type sports sedan could be used in Trans Am. This is why it became the showcase for the pony car wars.
I'm with 7T1, if it looks good and goes fast, who cares...
John
That's your opinion, you are entitled to that. But if you don't care then why respond?
And appearently some of us do care, I hate to hear people call cars that are not muscle cars, muscle cars. To me it's like putting Firebird wheels on a Camaro, or worse yet, putting a Z28 hood on a Camaro and then saying that it is a Z28, it's just dumb. Like I said, it's not an opinion it was an actual class of cars regardless of what any of our opinions are. And I think Road and Track mag. said it best and most completely then anything else I've found so far. That's why I posted it. Go argue with them.
terminology
sigh..
isnt it more like identifying When they were around,
then the cars themselves ..?
way back in the whoa old days,
it was thats a super car mister..
plastic bodied drag racer cars were funny cars...
now its muscle cars ..and they are going insane on the prices too..pretty soon they will all be snapped up.
i guess the only good thing is they will appreciate instead of the minivan sitting in the driveway depreciating while still making payments blargh.)
and,didnt we get a few models after 73 ??
worth mentioning?
maybe the roadrunner 77 r/t or even the lil red truck with 360 duals etc ,that outran the Vette of same year
..?
LMAO
This thread has created a couple of arguments, huh!!!! It's good to see the opinions that you all have in here. (I'm gunna keep my mouth shut tho, cos I see all your points!) A muscle car must be the car that an individual sees as a muscle car- doesn't matter what make, model, year, engine capacity, torque, Nm, Kw, color, or how many stripes and gadgets it has!!!
Chevy USA1 is just a purist with a strict definition. I can live with that now that I know his position.
John
You are absolutely correct. I know that there are times that everyone here thinks I'm being an a$$, or that I'm angry. Let me just say that if we were talking face to face you would have a different view/opinion, I think. I'm passionate about what I love, muscle cars, hot rods and racing...and though not related, NFL Football. And although some of you may disagree, the term "muscle car" is NOT just a term. It was a class of cars. I didn't post my opinion of what I think a muscle car is/was, I posted actual definitions that I found on the internet as well as a magazine. If you want my opinion of what I think a muscle car is I'll give it. But this topic was an attempt to show that these cars were in a class of their own. Unfortunately most of you here only believe what you want and stick by your opinions rather then seeing the facts. That's ok by me, but I don't like to look like an idiot when I call a car a muscle car, if you don't mind looking like an idiot when you say "it's a muscle car" when in actuality it is not then that's your choice. I would rather know facts and not base things on speculation or opinions. To each his own I guess.
car magazine reviews
omly 3 magazines road-tested a 1970 390 powered javelin,
and None got the car to run Less than 15 seconds in the quartermile,
the best time was 15.11 by the testers at Car Life (dec 1969)
with the improvements in the heads,a new motorcraft 4 bbl carb and the white stripe cam,what gives?
The answer is that Most auto manufacturers -except AMC-prepped their musclecars and even outright cheated before they gave their "production line" cars to the national magazines to test and get drag results.
young buyers bought hot factory cars based on buff magazines published quarter mile times
Detroit knew this,and some cars even had undisclosed blueprinted engines.
AMC,good or bad,never did this.
their quarter mile times were not always up with the Big Three cars,but they were Honest.
In the same issue of Car Life,a 1970 dodge challenger powered by a 6 pack 440 v-8 bolted to a 4 speed with 3:55 gear suregrip could only manage 14.64,only a half second quicker than the 390 javelin,and with 65 more horsepower.
its a good guess that the challenger was a dead stock car like it was supposed to be.
sooooooo....cheating factory musclecars?..cmon,gotta be kidding right
Gotta tell you, I'm not a big fan of Larry Mitchell. I would only believe about half of the things he writes. Most people in the hobby would agree with me.
And don't ask his "expert" opinion on AMC handling either...
blargh.)
Linear Mode
