This is just my thoughts, the old muscle cars of the 1960s had alot of power often over 400 horse power.
put some wide slicks on the back, and afew other modifications to the car depending on the car for example one might need larger jets, an other might need an intake manifold or HEI , or the exhaust pipes could be to small,
as we are looking at stock muscle cars not really set up to drag race at the factory.just as it would come out of the show room floor available to the general public. Then make some mods on that car.so i guess I'm talking both factory to start with, then a few mods.
what do you think it would take to get high 10s from the 1966 Corvette ?
what if you was to spray it.
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml
1966 Corvette 427 12.8@112 L72 427 425HP 4-Speed 3.36 gears
as we see the vet is in the 12.8s it and that information is from a cd on test ran along time ago it seems or i could be reading it wrong. 12.8 is fast for a factory car.
so my base thought is if the motor has 425 hp with afew mods it seems it would run high 10s
other than wide slicks who knows they may have ran with alot of things like a stock air filter small pipes or restrictive mufflers. have seen some funny things on the 60s cars.
and if that did not try a different cam intake manifold HEI and racing carbs with very big jets.
and it is just a thought and a conversational topic.

this link is fun to look at and the modern cars that run 12s.
and that 231 v6 Buick running 13s that must have been a fun little v6.
be sure to click on the link its fun reading.

 

Unlike so many members here, I was actually alive and could read back when those cars were new. The simple truth is none of those cars could be taken off the showroom floor straight out to the drag strip and run those times - even with slicks. It took a lot of tweaking to produce those timeslips. Nobody wanted to admit it at the time because they wanted to sell cars and magazines (there are rumors that the first 396 Camaro the factory loaned to the mags displaced closer to 500), but remember we're talking the days of points distributors, owner's manuals that had dealer servicing after only 1000 miles (with an extensive check/do list), horrible air cleaners/exhaust/tires (which you can be sure were not on the cars when those times were run), $400/month living wage, etc., etc., etc.

And, the NHRA stock class records for any of those combos (that qualify for stock class, anyway - doubt the Colbra does) have records that are much, much lower than that today. Of course, there's no such thing as a "streetable" stock class car, either...

Time to take off the rose-colored glasses. The "good old days" weren't as good as they are remembered; few people could afford the cars on the "Muscle" list just as few people can afford the cars on the modern list; most people have accomplished more on-line than in real-life...

 

Five7Kid, Yes this does help to shed some light on the ETs of the old muscle cars like the 1966 vet.
I agree with every thing you say, very true Five7Kid the cars are high dollar now. sorry to think some times of how many of the 1960 cars i cut up for scrap and helped cut up, but i guess thats part of the reason why the price is high now, did my part to help dwindle down the number of remaining 60s cars, well i was alive in 1966 but not yet reading car magazines. by the time i was 16 years old the 60s cars were junk the next to no body wanted. most people would say junk that thing and get some thing newer. you don't know what you have till its gone.
the motor going in to my thirdgen is a 454 made in 1974. and that is part of the reason i started digging for information on old cars and how they ran so fast on the hard rubber compounds the early tires had? and why the ETs would not be faster if the same car ran on the softer modern tires.
my early cars would do a sit and spin.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...&category=6168
my dad had a 1964 vet the dash and every thing looked just like this one. he sold his in non running condition for about 6k.
i helped change it from a 327 to a 302. not much low end and the racing cam made even less low end torque, a racing pressure plate with out springs made the clutch really grab some one not used to it could easy stall the motor at a stop light. but it would easily swing the tack to 10k any time you wanted it to.

 

Yea.... lots of those muscle cars aren't as fast as they are remembered to be...

Even the legendary Hemi 'Cuda ran mid 14's in stock form.

And, as very few people know, the 440 6 Pack cars were actually faster than the 426 Hemi cars.

Some, like the ZL1 and L88 cars, though, were as fast as they are remembered to be.

 

I actually watched a race between a new viper and a stock L88 427 vette. The out come to me was never in doubt. The VETTE smoked the viper hands down !! They were both running on good tires to make it equal. I am a firm believer in GOOD old american iron.:hail: :hail: :hail:

 

That sounds right to me that the 427 beat the viper.
in general I'm not a big viper fan do it its out of this worlds price.
it is nice looking but aesthetic-ally the 50s cars have more shining.
what i wonder is some one making a kit to put the newer over head cam heads on the older 350s? and why has it taken so long for GM to make 4 valve per cylinder over head cams for the v8s, 32 valves and 4 cams seems nice to me, what do you think?

 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. They're still getting good power out of a pushrod v8 with 2 valves per cylinder so why go to something more complicated?

 

If you look closely, Chevy Makes more power out of an engine than a ford does. For example, the Vette. Pushrod 2 valve, makes 400 hp and is small. Ford has a engine and has to super charge it to get up to that power. Chevy also has a 6.0 making 400 in the truck.. Ford cant touch that with a OHC 5.4 I beleive that makes around 280. Ha ha. Now dodge is getting up there with there hemi, but chevy has still have it.

 

lots of reasons that i like 4 valves in each cylinder,one is cam lift. and the springs don't need to be as strong if you run a blower. i could be wrong but the 350 vet heads have ohc.even with a push rod motor and one cam they still could use 4 valves. and all of this might only matter in a racing motor.yes it is more complicated and as such may take some time to see them use it more. i would bolt some 4 valve heads on my third gen if i could find some

 

Yep, you're wrong.

ZR-1 had OHC, that's the only one they ever did. Limited production, now "out".

 

just cause ford is using a blower to make more power doesn't make them a "cheater" lol. it just means chevy needs to up the power on it's n/a pushrod motors and make ford look really crappy!

 

Yep, LT-5. Dual overhead cam V-8. Already been done.