Beer Drinkin', Racin' 'n Football

[litl rooster]

  I read this yesterday over the Firearm forum, penned by Millwright, thought it would fit in here


Well $3.00/gal gas equates to .$.48/gal circa 1968 in a car getting around 12 mpg on high test. That makes $4.00/gal gas worth $.65 in 1968 dollars.

In 1968 a set of expensive tires only went around 20K miles, spark plugs maybe 3-5 K, oil/filters 3K, brakes 10K, premium shocks every 20K, you did a 'valve job' around 50K and 'overhauled' around 90-100K, and the list goes on......belts, hoses, wheel bearings, bulbs, and coolant flushes were a semi-annual event. With superior care a car would last around 150K miles.

In 2008 tires go 40K+, brakes 50K, oil/filters 5-7K, shocks/struts 50K, coolant flush 3-5 years, hoses at least 5 years, belts 3 years or more, you never do a 'valve job' or even an 'overhaul' unless you want to and a car will last over 200K miles with regular care. That car will yield 25-30 mpg and more horsepower on regular gas, corner at 50% higher "G", stop quicker and straighter, is quieter and more comfortable, and, above all, is safer to drive or in an accident.......

The "Good Ole' Days' of motor cars is right now........ >MW
     

[Steel Horse Bailey]

I'll agree mostly, Litl R, but with a few exceptions, the new cars just don't LOOK as cool or have as much "character."

And the old cars didn't have computers that actually compensate for worn spark plugs and air pressure or density - which helps in the power and MPG department. 


I sure wish I could still buy a '69 Hemi 'Cuda, 'tho!!  Or a '62 Impala Super-Sport convertible with the HO 327 that had a dual intake manifold with 2 2-barrel carbs.  Like I used to have.

Or ... 

[Four-Eyed Buck]

SHB, Dodge is coming out with an Redo on the Challenger this year, sorta along the lines of the newer Mustangs. GM is also showing a concept Camaro this year on the show circuit...........Buck

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Interesting!

Since a Challenger is essentially a citified 'Cuda ...

[Texas Lawdog]

Nascar is thinking about a Division for the Mustangs, and the Camaros if GM brings them back, and the Challenger for the Mopar.  Arcey, it looks those JGR Toyos are the ones to beat today.

[Arcey]

Kindah halfway wish NASCAR would scrap this thing 'n just go with Cup 'n  trucks.

The 18 is kilt. 

[litl rooster]

Interesting!

Since a Challenger is essentially a citified 'Cuda ...

Yep friend showed a link to me last year on the Challenger


Had Cuda  one time, was young n foolish....compared to now old and foolish

[Four-Eyed Buck]

One of my friends from when I grew up had a new '70. Copper color with a brown vinyl roof, 340 auto. Rolled it in a corn field, totalled. Beautiful car, though...................Buck

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Well!

4 Eyed Buck, thanks to you I sought information on the new Challenger.  I saw the one that they just auctioned for charity.  Serial # 43, $40K base price - it brought over $220,000.

And I think they screwed the pooch.  It got modernized (as it would have to) - but ugly.  I am VERY disappointed.  It looks too ... safe.  And rounded.  'Specially right under the front grill.  It's hard to describe.  I could probably FORCE myself to be seen in one    but honestly, even IF I had that kind of money, I wouldn't get one.  Your mileage may vary.

I didn't check out the "new" Camaro.  I was afraid they'd have changed it too much, too.



Don't get me wrong, it ain't UGLY ---- it just ain't  ... well ...

[Leo Tanner]

I love a Mopar product but there are a few models I'd jus as soon see them scrub.  That PT Cruiser is an abomonation as well as that Magnum.  While in KC I saw what happens in the match of PT vs. mailbox.  The Mailbox won an traffic was held up for hours while they cleared the plastic off the street.
     Woulld like to get behind the wheel of one of them Prowlers however...


Leo

[Arcey]

And I think they screwed the pooch.  It got modernized (as it would have to) - but ugly.  I am VERY disappointed.  It looks too ... safe.  And rounded.  'Specially right under the front grill.  It's hard to describe.  I could probably FORCE myself to be seen in one    but honestly, even IF I had that kind of money, I wouldn't get one.  Your mileage may vary.

Where I see the big difference, first glance at these retros, is the wheels 'n tires. A much bigger wheel 'n lower aspect ratio 'n wider tire. They're closer to the car's corners too.

Me, myownself, don't mind the tall wheels if they're done tastefully 'n the cars engineered for 'em i.e. the Challenger. Nothin' looks quite as dumb as some of the wheel 'n tire combinations folks fit ta vehicles what weren't. Makes 'em look like clown cars at the circus.

The retros are smaller. Lighter. Lower center of gravity. Better balanced. An entirely different engine package. Aero shaped slicker. They're built to turn. That, boys, is my game. A straight stretch is fun but they just connect the turns. Really get me a charge outtah off 'n on ramps or rides out in the country where I can let my ride be herself. Enjoy the five speed rather than cuss the clutch when yer stuck in traffic.

Just an opinion, course, but that's where the retros are gonna whip the originals. Thinkin' that might be the difference in the look too.

[Leo Tanner]

I rented a new Charger last time I flew into AZ.  Its a long ride from Pheonix to Sedona with some nice curves in the last stretch.  Have ta say it was a nice ride--comfortable and high performance rolled into one.  We had rented a convertable Mustang GT on the previous trip--looked good but not made for long rides if yer wife has a bad back.  I'd give the Charger an 8 out of 10 on all around performance and milage.


Leo

[Silver Creek Slim]

I've always liked Mopar. My favorite "modern" Mopars are:

But I shouldn't get behind the wheel of either. Would be too tempting ta see what they can do. 

This is my favorite Mopar.


Slim

[Leo Tanner]

Slim
     Yer first picture didn't show--would love to see it.  Remember the Super Bee?  That was a radical machine if I ever saw one.  Dusters were fun too as long as you had the 318 stead of that worthless straight six. 


Leo

[Arcey]

"Gentlemen, start your U.A.W. engines." I guess the Toyota drivers can't start theirs..

[Four-Eyed Buck]

I liked the original Challengers, but my personal favorite was the Mustangs. Guess I just understood the Ford's better. The GTX Dodge for '67 was a real thumper, too.
Susie's mid life crisis has as much standard horse power as the standard 289's did then, but out of a 4 liter V-6( 205 ponies). It does corner/steer better than my old ones. Lesse' 61x4=244. That engine is a 244ci by the old standards, original Windsor V-8's started out at 223, went to 260, then 289, then 302. The last incarnation was the 351......Buck

[Leo Tanner]

Great thread Arcey!!!
     I can see this un goin on an on   
     As far as the 351's go Cleavland beat the snot out a Windsor.  289 an 302 had a good run from the factory an both were great motors.  The ATDC firing as opposed to the competion's BTDC really gave em some longevity.
     Luv talkin cars 


Leo

[Ozark Tracker]

I remember well the late 60's,  my Chevelle thought straight was the only direction to go.  made a world of passes down a quarter mile.
I'm sure my little Toyota pickup would beat the old Chevelle on a road course,  It corners great.  but them quick runs sure were fun,  stop light to stop light.  it was just run what ya brung back then, a good foot on the clutch could overcome a lot of horsepower sometimes,  didn't need no stinking air conditioner back then, took away too much power,  
when I was in College up at Stillwater, used to run whatever came along,  remember along about 1970 or 71 the 440  6 pack came out, ran a lot of those and beat a lot them,  too much power to get to the ground,  tires were awful back then.

lots of memories

[Texas Lawdog]

The Cleveland heads beat the Windsor ones hands down. We got a couple of new 74 Torinos with the Cleveland engines and they ran good.  In 75, we got 2 more, but they had 460s in them. Man were they a handful. That was the only year they offered the 460 in the Torino.  In 76, we got 2 with the 351 Windsors, man they were dogs. They wouldn't run fast enough to catch a cold.

[Four-Eyed Buck]

The Cleveland's had different heads and four-bolt mains compared to the Windsor's two bolts. They tried to marry them at one time as a performance mod, and then Ford came out with that 351M that wasn't too successful. Believe the lowered compresson rates foiled that one..............Buck