Did anyone see Musclecar TV on Spike this morning

[breeaad]

It never stops surprising me when I see actual performace numbers from the muscle car era. This morning was no exception. They featured a 64 Olds 442 330cid 4 speed and stated the perfomace to be 0-60 in 7.x seconds and 1/4mile times in the mid-15's. I know i know, these times where factory times with bias-ply tires and could have been underated a bit. But still, those are numbers my dog of an 86 442 would put up.

But what I found to be kind of funny was they were teasing the meaning of "442" on the last model, 90-91 Calais 442 (4 cylinder, 4 valves/cylinder, 2 cams). But that 4 banger is quite a bit faster than the 64 model featured. IIRC, the 90-91 posted numbers of around a 6-second 0-60 and 1/4 times in the low 14's. And they were teasing it? I tell you, I may be a dork but I wouldn't mind having one of the Calais 442's for my daily driver.

 

[2fit661ca]

It never stops surprising me when I see actual performace numbers from the muscle car era. This morning was no exception. They featured a 64 Olds 442 330cid 4 speed and stated the perfomace to be 0-60 in 7.x seconds and 1/4mile times in the mid-15's. I know i know, these times where factory times with bias-ply tires and could have been underated a bit. But still, those are numbers my dog of an 86 442 would put up.

But what I found to be kind of funny was they were teasing the meaning of "442" on the last model, 90-91 Calais 442 (4 cylinder, 4 valves/cylinder, 2 cams). But that 4 banger is quite a bit faster than the 64 model featured. IIRC, the 90-91 posted numbers of around a 6-second 0-60 and 1/4 times in the low 14's. And they were teasing it? I tell you, I may be a dork but I wouldn't mind having one of the Calais 442's for my daily driver.

*no, i did not see the show.

That little Quad-4 in the Calais 442 is a damned powerful little motor, but there are not exactly the most reliable motor in the world... I'd pass on the daily driver for that reasn, thoug I'd still like to own one.

 

[86Cutlass383SR]

I saw the same episode Sat morning. You have to remember, when GM and the other corporations started slipping these out the door, many questions had to be answered. Would they be well received by the public? Corporate policies allow it? Many others.

At the time, they were just taking larger engines than normal and dropping them in. Not the common *hi-perf* motors. They didn't have those yet.

Also, when comparing the 64's to the 90's V6's you have to remember the 25+ years of technology between them. Compare the same V6 to an LS7 Vette which pushes 505 hp from the factory. And they both (supposedly, I don't own neither one) pull down 30 mpg.

But, the 64 and up muscle cars are the one's that go it all started. 54 and 55 was when the idea got started but basically got let loose in the mid 60's.

Beside, leaving them *stock* wasn't in the plans for the most part. Many models were released with the knowledge that the new owner was going to modify them. Did you know some of the 63 Chevy 409
s came stock with 2 head gaskets on each side? Those in the know would pull one gasket off and bump compression for a *factory stock* race car !!!

There are many cool stories of the how's and why's of some of those car ... Ahhh, the good ole days ...

 

[patmckinneyracing]

Yeah the 442 was nice. But damn I'd take that Cuda any day of the week. Maybe I oughta look up the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for a 440+6 Cuda :lol: Of course that wouldn't be fair since it was originally a slant six car.

 

[86Cutlass383SR]

What wouldn't be fair is comparing the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times with the bias belted tires that were stock on them...

I say get a bone-stock car of each and every brand and put oncomparable size modern drag radials and compare those times to the same times listed for the older tires to see how they compare with todays cars.

I'm not sticking up for the older muscle cars (although I do love most all of them) but the engines were also rated differantly back them as they are today. Back then an engine was rated with no accessories or mufflers. Add all the acc and the same exhaust as is used in the car today and that's how the new motors are rated.

Compare an older 350 hp engine with everything hooked up as in a car and you've dropped it down to about 300 hp. Refering back to the new Vettes with the LS7 (505 hp) and the LS9 (638 hp with the factory blower !) and that's with it measured street legal.

Yeah, that Cuda was sweeeeet. And bad-*ss! I love streetfighters! I'm considering doing something simular to my Cutlass ... I can hear it now ...

 

[olds307 and 403]

Remember Olds was working on some much meaner motors. Their Hemi 32 valve would killed nearly anything else, was supposed come out in the 67 442. 400 hp with 8.5 to 1, a 750 Qjet and a .400 lift cam! 650 hp and big torque with 10.5 to 1, a 800 cfm Qjet and a big cam. The DOHC 455 put out over 700 hp, that one should have came out at some point, even as a 350.

 

[jae]

Caught the episode awhile ago, pretty good to see the pay-off of the "cuda". Haven't watched in a LOOOOOONNNGGGG time, got sick of waiting for Red-Sled, Challenger and the gasser Merc to be completed.

My older cousin had one of those Quad 4 Calais, International model and I worked on a few of them. The two main problems that made them "unreliable" were the head gasket and the DIS system. Remember, that engine had an iron block and aluminum head, so the cooling rate between the two were different (expansion / retraction). So GM used a cheap-a head gasket and after so many heat/cool cycles, gasket let go. With the ignition system, time & heat would cause the coil pack the crack and it would short to ground, causing irratic performance.

They finally solved those issues when it was redone in later forms and then lived on until kind of recently. but most went to junkyard too soon like those first-gen VTECs.

Funny thing was I had my '81 Calais at the time he had his Calais, and though he's was hella quicker I still preferred my slow-boat 260-powered one.

Yes, engines were rated differently back then but sometimes the "over-rated" gross hp numbers are actually underrated, like on the 7-liter Fords, 428CJs, L88s, Z11s. A lot of time you couldn't get accessories on them like ps, pb, a/c, especially on the 7-liter Fords. Then there was the game of taking hp measurements at lower rpms than at its peak. Fun stuff. But correct, the SAE-certified net hp of the LSs is

 

[86Cutlass383SR]

Yeah, that's very true about where they rated the engines. Good point. Sometimes, to get an engine available to a certain model, it was very under rated. I've heard of several *factory stock* ZL-1's pushing over 600 hp with open headers and a good super tune on an engine dyno. The (Chevy) 302 DZ Z-28 motor was rated at 290 hp @ about 5200 rpm. 11-1 compression and a solid lifter cam ... try 400 - 450 hp in the 6000 - 7000 rpm range !

Another thing people do/did was compare cams of older days with cams of today. They used advertised duration instead of todays @ .050" lift figures.

 

[jae]

Exactly, I laughed myself at the rating for the DZ302. My thing was that it had to be underrated because the 4" bore of the 327 block + 3" stroke of the 283 crank = high rpm fun and hp peak, so rating it @ 5200 was funny. Yeah, those ZL-1s are insane!!! I mean, a regular "prepped" 427 will throw you into the back seat, but a ZL-1...

I'm not sure if you caught it or not, but a couple years ago the "American Muscle Car" show on Speed did a hp/torque test on some of the old iron, to kind of answer the question of, not so much gross/net but whether or not the engines made their advertised power. Long story short (like I could ever accomplish that LOL), they took freshly rebuilt / broken in motors, reassembled the way they would've come from the factory and ran them on an engine dyno. No extra hi-lift cams, exotic parts, forged internals unless it came that way, no 4-bolt main conversions, etc. Had a 421 SD, 409/425 hp, L88, 426 Hemi and maybe a 427 Ford. The only one that hit it's hp/tq number as advertised was the '63 409, the rest :shock: . I remember the Poncho making crazy torque and hp, but they shut it down early because they didn't want to scatter anything seeing as though it was "really rare" like the 409. The craziest one was the Hemi: the customer told them to beat the hell out of it and that bad boy was still pulling when they shut it down. It look like it wanted to come off the stand. :shock: :shock:

They were supposed to do a small-block episode but I've never seen it.

 

[Oldsmoletick]

I'm not sure if you caught it or not, but a couple years ago the "American Muscle Car" show on Speed did a hp/torque test on some of the old iron, to kind of answer the question of, not so much gross/net but whether or not the engines made their advertised power. Long story short (like I could ever accomplish that LOL), they took freshly rebuilt / broken in motors, reassembled the way they would've come from the factory and ran them on an engine dyno. No extra hi-lift cams, exotic parts, forged internals unless it came that way, no 4-bolt main conversions, etc. Had a 421 SD, 409/425 hp, L88, 426 Hemi and maybe a 427 Ford. The only one that hit it's hp/tq number as advertised was the '63 409, the rest :shock: . I remember the Poncho making crazy torque and hp, but they shut it down early because they didn't want to scatter anything seeing as though it was "really rare" like the 409. The craziest one was the Hemi: the customer told them to beat the hell out of it and that bad boy was still pulling when they shut it down. It look like it wanted to come off the stand. :shock: :shock:

I remember watching that one. :shock: