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, 04:26 PM   #1
Superfan1
VIP Member
 
Superfan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bridgeport,CT.
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 1,667
Liked 2,642 Times in 441 Posts
Talking Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Lee View Post
Hmmm...how about the '67 Mustang 390? What a pig. Now, with NHRA allowed superseded parts (block, heads, ,oil pan, intake, carb), it's super fast!
And when I see a '69 Mach 1 cross the auction blocks with (big bold advertising!) a 390 under the hood for big bucks, I want to yell...sucker!

And I would gladly race a stock '68-'69 340 Dart with a 4-speed and 3.91's against a stock '66 Chevy II 327/350 with 3.73's. I think it would all depend on who was driving.
Jeff, as a general statement, I agree with you. However, I was fortunate enough to have a very fast '67 390, 4-speed. Bone stock, just as it was delivered, it ran 13.8s@103 mph. The other 390 Mustangs were running very high 14s@95 mph! The only cars that I couldn't beat were 396/375 Camaros and Chevelles. To this day I have no idea why it was so much faster than the average 390, but I sure surprised a lot of people with it and I had a lot of fun.
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT
__________________
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT
Superfan1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 05:14 PM   #2
Paul Ceasrine
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Those 1966 Dodge Chargers with the 383/325HP were no fun,
Over 3700lbs. of steel.
Just what could you use that car for?
PC
Paul Ceasrine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 05:47 PM   #3
Frank Castros
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Lowcountry.
Posts: 3,008
Likes: 2,689
Liked 2,758 Times in 975 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Like some of you I'm old enough to remember the true muscle years.
I drove a friends '69 Boss 429 Mustang: Very over rated performance but impressive with the hood open.
I owned a '69 383, 4-speed, 3.23, Road Runner: 13.80s with street tires, headers, tweaked AVS and recurved distributor. Not bad.
When the '71 Dusters & Demons came out with the Thermo Quad and 3.91 gears they kicked some butt right out of the box.
Frank Castros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2010, 06:52 PM   #4
X-TECH MAN
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,203
Likes: 1,047
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
Smile Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superfan1 View Post
Jeff, as a general statement, I agree with you. However, I was fortunate enough to have a very fast '67 390, 4-speed. Bone stock, just as it was delivered, it ran 13.8s@103 mph. The other 390 Mustangs were running very high 14s@95 mph! The only cars that I couldn't beat were 396/375 Camaros and Chevelles. To this day I have no idea why it was so much faster than the average 390, but I sure surprised a lot of people with it and I had a lot of fun.
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT
Someone stuck a pre production 428 CJ in it when you were not looking.....lol. My buddy had one and it was a dog.
X-TECH MAN 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 04:53 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.