Looked again...might have been a Hemi Dart. Also found muscle car reference to a Land Rover in January 1964 Popular Mechanics.
Bruce
Looked again...might have been a Hemi Dart. Also found muscle car reference to a Land Rover in January 1964 Popular Mechanics.
Bruce
Kenny_McCormic wrote: I always thought the drive shaft in those was neat. All in the name of a flatter floor.
Yep, the fact that it was "bent" was really neat and got a lot of comment.
So I read the story... My understanding is that, on a 2.5 mile banked oval, a car with 6.7 liters displacement went faster than a Ferrari with 3 liters of displacement. Um, where's the punchline?
David
The driveshaft was curved to control harmonic vibrations, but it also helped to provide clearance for the floorpan.
DWNSHFT wrote: Um, where's the punchline?
It was a cheap Pontiac passenger car (albeit with a special engine installed) while the Ferraris were thoroughbred racecars.
In reply to DWNSHFT:
Aerodynamics my friend, aerodynamics.
I agree with the peanut gallery under that story......the Super Duty Pontiacs were honestly mean.
stuart in mn wrote:DWNSHFT wrote: Um, where's the punchline?It was a cheap Pontiac passenger car (albeit with a special engine installed) while the Ferraris were thoroughbred racecars.
I see what you are saying, but it all depends on how you look at it. Looking at it another way, the Ferrari was actually sold in a street legal version, and IIRC the race versions weren't much different than the street versions. But that Tempest was a specially prepared race car with a much larger engine.
You'll need to log in to post.
