HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-08-2010, 03:05 PM   #1
Ron Ortiz
Senior Member
 
Ron Ortiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Englewood, Florida
Posts: 990
Likes: 36
Liked 317 Times in 103 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

383 Road Runners were not as quick as the road runner itself.

Ron Ortiz
U/SA thats why I have a 273
__________________
Ron Ortiz 2102 STK
Ron Ortiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 03:43 PM   #2
Paul Precht
Senior Member
 
Paul Precht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Elysburg, Pa
Posts: 733
Likes: 362
Liked 327 Times in 121 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Ortiz View Post
383 Road Runners were not as quick as the road runner itself.

Ron Ortiz
U/SA thats why I have a 273
Back in the late 70s I had a girlfriend who bought a 68 383 R Runner from her aunt for $500. I used it to tow my car to the track sometimes, it was very quick I thought and had a 3.55 rear. The motor was untouched with old plugs, wires, exhaust, stock vacuum dist, AVS and air cleaner. I finally got it down the track one day for fun and it ran 14.20s with zero effort. Paul.
Paul Precht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 03:51 PM   #3
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,203
Likes: 1,047
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Cool Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

My new 1965 Plymouth 426 Street wedge was a turd against the GTO's in 1965. It was just an over grown 383.
X-TECH MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 08:01 PM   #4
Paul Precht
Senior Member
 
Paul Precht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Elysburg, Pa
Posts: 733
Likes: 362
Liked 327 Times in 121 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-TECH MAN View Post
My new 1965 Plymouth 426 Street wedge was a turd against the GTO's in 1965. It was just an over grown 383.
Even worse, it was an over grown 361/305. Same style mani, same carb, cam and heads, although the heads had different casting nos. I had a stock 426/365 64 Ply back in 73. When I added a TM7, 4779 Holley and 59 dollar headers it ran 12.90s,13.34 with a dual plane Edelbrock, so as bad as the heads and cam were they far from the biggest problem. With a borrowed 6 Pak some pocket porting and a stock 426 STG1 cam it ran a best of 12.28 with the stock 12" conv still in place.
Paul Precht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 03:53 PM   #5
Jim Cimarolli
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sulphur Springs Texas
Posts: 743
Likes: 147
Liked 166 Times in 46 Posts
Smile Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

I had one of those 454 SS trucks in my shop not long ago, the owner had taken very good care of it through the years, and I was even surprised how big a turd it was. I say surprised because I knew real well how big a turd the 454 throttle body engine was, but I thought it might be OK in a 1/2 ton pickup, and the darn things even had a 3:73 gear with a regular 400 tranny too. Sick!
I thought those 340 six-packs ran pretty good, but I never got to drive one. Were they much better than a single four 340?
Jim Cimarolli is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.