I have a 1974 CJ5 w/a 360 & manaul trans. It has the usual bolt on stuff (headers, intake, carb, HEI) and is otherwise stock. It's not fast, but it feels FAST! (It's "back in the day" fast.) The light weight, super short wheelbase, archaic design (manual brakes, manual steering, 100% bare bones), and small lift make it very exciting.
I took a coworker out to lunch the other day and accelerated hard from a stop - smoking the tires in the process. He was big-eyed and raving about how fast it is.
His electric KIA is faster.
In reply to Tom1200 :
Fox Mustangs were running 13's just barely breathing on them back in the day. I think an air filter, cat back, and some timing tweaks got you there. They are also a lot lighter than a 2nd Gen F-Body and the 5.0 H.O. cars came with more power to start with. A REAL late 70's Z28 made 175-185hp depending on whether you were in California or not. You could make some tweaks to make more power, but you're looking at at least a cam, intake manifold, and full exhaust from the engine back along with rear gears before you're sniffing the 13's in one of those.
In reply to Motojunky :
If "back in the day fast" isn't already a widely accepted term to describe old performance cars' capabilities, it should be. I know EXACTLY what you are talking about when you say that. Love it!
I really enjoyed owning my DSM's in the '90's. Most people back then thought a fast car had to have a V8. The cheapest way to get a V8 was to get a truck. Lots of people running around in trucks (especially the Dodge RT's with the stripes) thinking there was no way that a 4 banger could be faster. It didn't take much to make a DSM much quicker than the pony cars of the day. Mildly modded, they would leave a lot of Mustang and Camaro owners scratching their heads at the strip.
Is there an equivalent today? A budget priced, underdog car that can run with modern pony cars? There are some fast 4 cylinders, but they are expensive and the performance bar is much higher now.
Tony Sestito said:
In reply to Motojunky :
If "back in the day fast" isn't already a widely accepted term to describe old performance cars' capabilities, it should be. I know EXACTLY what you are talking about when you say that. Love it!
As far as I know, I just pulled that out of thin air. You are welcome to run with it. :)
I have several "back in the day fast" cars and I really like them. They push my buttons in a very visceral way. A new Camry would outrun them all.
Boost_Crazy said:
I really enjoyed owning my DSM's in the '90's.
Oooh! A good friend got the first Eagle Talon TSI (AWD, Turbo, manual) in our area. He couldn't drive a manual very well and for several weeks his favorite thing to do was to have me drive and race every Monte Carlo SS, Camaro, and Mustang we could find. The Mustangs were risky as it didn't take much work for them to be faster but the Monte Carlos & IROCs were easy prey. We surprised a lot of people with that car.
Funny thing about that car - on a hard 1-2 shift, the wipers would turn on. After a few times, he learned to reach over from the passenger seat to turn them off mid-race.
Man, I sure miss being young and stupid!
Tony Sestito said:
A 300hp SBC in a 2nd Gen Camaro will make fun noises and that's about it. Might be good for mid-15's in the 1/4 if they can drive. Being a regular late 2nd Gen Camaro (and not a Z28) and being "that guy" means he's probably got a hold of an 80's 2-bolt truck engine with a smattering of Autozone chrome aisle accessories and MAYBE an Edelbrock Performer intake sitting on top, all while retaining the stock 2.41 ratio open diff rear end. I've seen "that guy" at the track get walked by first timers in their mom's Accord.
He was definitely that guy, and very sure he wasn't.
He really loved this " totally stock rare z28" color that he was repainting it. It looked a lot like British Racing Green, I don't remember seeing a Camaro painted that but i don't know jack about them either.
The paint seemed like most of the reason he thought it would be fast thinking back actually
In reply to Antihero :
It's probably this color, which I have to admit is pretty cool.
But if we're talking "back in the day fast" cars in green, I prefer the earlier 1973 Trans Am's Brewster Green. And you could get these with a Super Duty 455, which are actually real-world fast.
ShawnG
MegaDork
9/5/24 3:20 p.m.
A lot of the "back in the day fast" cars were geared like garbage too, in search of fuel economy.
2.72 or 3.08 gears and 170hp is awful.
Doug Nash even built a transmission (now the Richmond 5-speed) with a super-low 1st gear and direct 5th to give these cars some oomph. You could keep your 2.72 with the 1:1 5th gear and have decent highway cruising but still launch like you had a 3.73 or 4.10 gearset in the diff.
Best thing you can do with those cars is gear them right and let the engine breathe.
As for the F-body, the 455SD and 455HO were great engines. Even the Ram Air 400s and 350HO were nothing to complain about.
The Olds 403 and Pontiac 301 were the result of having to comply with emissions laws. GM Didn't want to spend money certifying the same displacement engine several times over so they chose one or two in each size and you got what you got.
In reply to Tony Sestito :
Much darker than the first pic and greener than the 2nd.
I believe he called it " Championship Green"
And I like the first green, I'll have to mentally file that
In reply to ShawnG :
My Mustang is pulling something like 1200RPM in 5th gear at 45 mph. I don't use 5th around town much. I think it has the 3.08 R&P as it's a 5 speed.
When we auto crossed the car it easily did the whole course in 2nd gear. We got spanked by an STS class Honda Fit. My son and I are still laughing about that.
I will likely go to 3.55 gears at some point. That coupled with the target 300hp should make it much faster..........and it will still be slow.
Motojunky said:
Antihero said:
In reply to Tony Sestito :
Much darker than the first pic and greener than the 2nd.
I believe he called it " Championship Green"
And I like the first green, I'll have to mentally file that
This?
Closer definitely but still not exactly right.
I'll see if I can find something close
This is the closest I can find
