Race this brand new '57 Plymouth?

sg1838 · 06-13-2007, 12:59 PM

Bill,

When you fist posted about cost, I was going to make a comment about how with inflation the money that you spent in the 60's was probably worth more than you thought today. But, you've already done the calculations, and quite honestly I'm surprised to see that it's really that little. Obviously, you can't do much with $7,500 today speed-wise, but I almost wonder if the cost to go a specific ET hasn't changed over the years.

What did it cost to build a car in the 60's that would run in the mid-9's? Adjusted for inflation, would that really be much different than today? I'm not sure...

Like you said, people's perceptions of speed had changed a lot over the years. It amazes me the HP that bone-stock cars have today, and nobody thinks twice about it. My 1994 Suburban with a 350 is rated at something like 210 hp. My 2006 Pacifica with a 6-cylinder makes something like 225 hp. Yet, I hook my enclosed trailer up to my Suburban occasionally, but I couldn't imagine doing so with my Pacifica.

Upon browsing RacingJunk.com, it does seem quite feasible to put together something that could run probably in the mid-12's for about $7,500...less if you'd be willing to live with a roadster like a bantam or something like that. Using a car like that, you could probably get in to the mid-10's pretty easily, though the only thing you could run with it is Super Pro.

Plus, you know as well as I do that any car that you would run today would be much safer than anything of the same speed from 40 to 50 years ago. Of course, it wouldn't be a classic! [:-happy-:]

Now, if you said you wanted to run the SAME class for $7,500, well, then we'd have a problem.

Jason Oldfield
S/G & S/ST 1838

06-13-2007, 12:59 PM	#21
sg1838 Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 80 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Bill, When you fist posted about cost, I was going to make a comment about how with inflation the money that you spent in the 60's was probably worth more than you thought today. But, you've already done the calculations, and quite honestly I'm surprised to see that it's really that little. Obviously, you can't do much with $7,500 today speed-wise, but I almost wonder if the cost to go a specific ET hasn't changed over the years. What did it cost to build a car in the 60's that would run in the mid-9's? Adjusted for inflation, would that really be much different than today? I'm not sure... Like you said, people's perceptions of speed had changed a lot over the years. It amazes me the HP that bone-stock cars have today, and nobody thinks twice about it. My 1994 Suburban with a 350 is rated at something like 210 hp. My 2006 Pacifica with a 6-cylinder makes something like 225 hp. Yet, I hook my enclosed trailer up to my Suburban occasionally, but I couldn't imagine doing so with my Pacifica. Upon browsing RacingJunk.com, it does seem quite feasible to put together something that could run probably in the mid-12's for about $7,500...less if you'd be willing to live with a roadster like a bantam or something like that. Using a car like that, you could probably get in to the mid-10's pretty easily, though the only thing you could run with it is Super Pro. Plus, you know as well as I do that any car that you would run today would be much safer than anything of the same speed from 40 to 50 years ago. Of course, it wouldn't be a classic! [:-happy-:] Now, if you said you wanted to run the SAME class for $7,500, well, then we'd have a problem. Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838