People who hate muscle cars have never taken a long road trip

>>15808159
Lol kys virgin loser

>>15808159
People who love muscle cars live in flyover states, not where the real roads are, up in the mountains.

>>15808159
Those american fuel devouring cars are only fun if you are rich as fuck and dont mind spending millions on fuel.

>american car making a long road trip
kek thanks man i needed that.

>>15808174
Maybe if you live in Europe.

>>15808177
Do euros even know what a long road trip is?

>>15808189
yes, any city in turkey to berlin.

>>15808189
No, they take a train or airplane instead.

File: stolen pony crying sad fox news why.jpg (49KB, 374x373px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 374x373px

>>15808164
>ywn build a toguemonster vintage mustang

>>15808174
Jesus where do you live?
>>15808164
>implying they aren't fun there too

>>15808213
Don't mind him, he's probably a yurocuck that doesn't understand freedom.

File: eurocucks mustang.png (225KB, 975x734px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 975x734px

>>15808213
>Jesus where do you live?
Isn't it obvious where he lives?

File: Eurocucks.jpg (88KB, 1000x1022px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1000x1022px

>>15808217
Fuck, wrong image

wtf I love ford now

>>15808217
>GT, the only model that matters
>100k euro in Europe
>32k euros in America (36k USD)

Jesus Christ

>>15808238
gotta pay for all that cultural enrichment somehow, and the easiest way to do that is to tax personal freedom

Genuine question. What's the point of taking/making a car for a road trip that only gets 11 mpg? I'm all for it, but you'd be refilling every 30 minutes and I'd think that would get annoying.

>>15808213
>>15808216
>>15808217
I live in European state where 1 litre of gasoline costs 1,16 US dollars and 1 litre of diesel 1,125 US dollars

>>15808226
>>15808217
SUCH IS LIFE IN YUROPOORIA

>>15808226
>Americans can't afford to spent that much on a car
Keep driving your 30 year old 120hp "muscle cars" Lol

>>15808226
Nigga there must be something wrong with that site!
Even in gypsyland Romania, the most expensive GT is 44,250 euros

File: 1438665228395[1].jpg (80KB, 1140x475px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1140x475px

someone post the image of yurocuck /o/ posters' cars

>>15808250
>liters

can you translate that into English? Thanks.

File: M.png (167KB, 968x437px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 968x437px

>>15808268
No, it's just a country that actively tries to limit personal freedom as much as possible.

>>15808306
>personal freedom
>cost of a car
LOL the two aren't related
You probably think driving is a "right" and not a privilege

>>15808319
A car definitely is a symbol of personal freedom. Limiting car ownership means limiting personal freedom.

>>15808297
Google it up amerifag.

>>15808329
>symbol of personal freedom
>use is subject to government
Lol okay

>>15808306
Blame CO2 tax. That's why Tesla's are cheap as fuck compared to other countries and every middle management turd drives one.

Also weirdly enough a Land Cruiser is cheaper in the Netherlands than in the US

File: JBNdFtr.jpg (183KB, 670x534px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 670x534px

Thank god these cars are not available in Europe. Instead, we are much more efficient and smarter than Americans with their resource hogging shitboxes that kill the earth only to make them feel "free".

>>15808435
Yes, 1.3l FWD diesel cuckboxes are just as fun as a 500hp RWD V8!

>>15808444
Bbbut I don't want those cars likes evos and skylines and other cool rare cars! But you Europeans want shitty trucks that you can't have even though you could import them if you so desire! You're just j-j-jealous!

>>15808444
>25 year rule
>instated and passed becuase a German company whined and bitched becuase people werent willing to pay for their overpriced shit.

>>15808249
>9.5 mpg
>33 gallon fuel tank

>>15808159
I don't hate em, they're pretty cool, but try tight turns at track speeds and you'll be shitting your pants. Drove my brother's new-ish mustang gt and the cornering sucked. Muscle cars usually have pretty bad weight distribution with the big ol' v8 in the front and not much else in the rest of the car.

>>15808552
That's right, blame anyone but your own government, good goy

>>15808159
Bread on hood or fuck off.

I can't dispute the claim but I'm sure as shit certain you've never done this.

File: ford-falcon-351-gt-xb-1973-76-2.jpg (1MB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1440px

>>15808159
>american muscle
Yeah nah cunt, fuck you and your Mustangs.

>tfw waiting patiently for the boomers to croak

>>15808435
What a boring shoop.
At least add Godzilla or something

>>15808249
Well first of they generally have larger fuel tanks. Secondly if you plan the trip right most of those fuel stops will double as visiting a local wonder

File: squad.jpg (258KB, 2048x943px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 2048x943px

>>15808159
>jap cars arent fun on the highway
what the fuck am i reading?

>>15809054
Boomers have never heard of the wangan.

>>15808249
taking in the fact that the car was made over 35 years ago in the pic and 11 mpg wasnt to aids back then but any muscle car nowadays gets over that by a long shot. while your shitter m3 gets like 17

>>15808435
>much smarter
holy fuck thanks for the laugh yurofag
if your so smart explain why Germany (your highest gdp) is 6 times smaller than the USA
oh yeah you faggots cant grasp true capitalism

>>15809125
>your so smart
Gdp has a lot to do with population size anon

If you like muscle cars you have a small dick women like BMW's, Mercedes, and Audis. The sportiest car you can get away with when with a girl is an m4 unless you wanna shell out the money for a ferrari, lambo, bentley, or rolls

>>15809125
It's bait. Germans resent the cuck taxes on vehicles. Even smelly Portuguese like Mjet dream of big V8 engines in RWD land boats.

>>15809125
>USA
>a shining example of true capitalism
Don't make me laugh

that sounds horrible

just like muscle cars

you also sound horribly underaged

>>15808189
Europeans travel far more than Americans

>>15809097
>shitter m3

It's terrifying that your country has nukes

>>15810585
Traveling to your neighboring countries is hardly traveling. That's like a normal drive in America.

>>15808159
Clearly youve never taken a road trip either, otherwise youd know what a torture deafening noise is long term.

>>15809060
>Boomers
>Critical thinking

Pick one. I KNOW WHAT I GOT.

File: 1449095611901.jpg (174KB, 454x1007px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 454x1007px

>ITT:

>>15810591
>347c.I.
>.542 lift cam
>Paxton
>x-pipe
>1440 miles cross country
>my ass is still rattling 11 years later.

I'm all about american iron, but fuck OP-
Delusions are a sign of schizophrenia.

File: 1468222460733.jpg (110KB, 497x640px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 497x640px

>>15808159
>mfw this is the fag that posted a thread days ago about breaking down in his piece of shit 68 mustang while driving a 2000 mile road trip
still mad at my "rising sun" reply?
get BTFO

File: i wish i could move that gear up.jpg (87KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x450px

>europoor
>only muscle car i've ever seen irl is a chevelle that was a part of a clothing store's decoration

it's not even there anymore

>>15810601
perfect image

>>15808658
That's why we Americans are so fat
We have to balance out the engine somehow

>>15808297
Canadian to the rescue.
One gallon is just under 4 litres

>>15808159
Joke's on you I already wanted to kill myself before I took my japanese car on the highway

>>15808159
Muscle cars are slow, bad on fuel, shit at handling and cheaply put together. Of course i don't like them.

>>15808297
1gal approximately 3.8 liters. I'm American myself but at least I have an education, did you drop out of middle school?

>muscle cars can't turn!
False, steering back in the day was so sloppy in most cars that you had more trouble keeping them on the road, additionally shitty bias ply.
>They are slow!
False, the original HEMI was the first production engine to achieve 1hp/1cui ratio with massive torque as well. At about 345 horsepower in 1954 with, most commonly, horrible autoboxes, the Chrysler 300C topped out at 138mph. Cars these days can barely manage that as well.

>they were bad on gas
True that a 5 liter V8 with dual quads will be poor with mileage but consider that cars from the 50's-70s were NOT aerodynamic whatsoever, used horrible bias tires and not-that-great oil. With modern oil and tires you could get better mpg.
By 1975, with advancements in aerodynamics, smallblock V8s were getting, impressive for the time, 15-17 mpg. My old S10 got like 11 with a V6 Vortec.

>>15812187
>cheaply put together.
Completely false, the powertrain of any Detroit car from the muscle era were just about indestructible.

>>15810467
Find a woman who won't orgasm to a chevelles 454 purr.

File: tumblr.jpg (54KB, 552x670px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 552x670px

>>15812203

>>15808297
Joke's on you, the English measure fuel in liters, too.

>>15812208
Sure got me on that one! Gunna go call 1-800-kms

>>15812214
You know i'm right bro.
Take any classic to a college town and bathe in the disgust.

>>15808238
>>15808254
>Europe somehow is one country again
Mustang GT starts at $40,600 before taxes in Germany after being shipped over from Murrika, which is only negligibly more expensive than the $33,000 it costs in the US.

>>15808174
>Millions in fuel
Son, a million euros gets you about 600.000 liters of fuel in the Netherlands (the most expensive gas in Europe iirc), which, even in a 4km/l car (sub 10mpg) that's still 2.4 million km's or about 1.5 million miles. Most cars fall apart before you get there.

File: taxicab.jpg (695KB, 2048x1381px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 2048x1381px

ITT: the sourest grapes

>>15812219
>using logic and reason against yuros
like using lightning attacks against a graveler.

>>15812197
>Worse handling than european sports cars
>Slower than european sports cars (Straight line speed means nothinh)
>Reliable ≠ Good quality/refined. Reliability came from ancient technology and simplicity, not build quality.

>>15811831
>Europoor
>Ridden in Corvette, Ram 2500, several landyachts Cadillacs and a fuckin' Vista Cruiser
>Drove a Ram 1500
Feels pretty good. Muscle cars can be found here, although they're absolutely rare. Even saw a German C7 Z07 last week (convertible, automatic, bald boomer driving with trophy wife in passenger seat).

>>15808346
>Also weirdly enough a Land Cruiser is cheaper in the Netherlands than in the US
That's because it's taxed as a work vehicle, as are those Ram 1500's. They aren't even taxed on their LPG installations, which means they have the running costs of a 15km/l shitbox.

>>15810467
Found the normie.

>>15808189
No we don't. I've been in Canada for a month with a family. Traveled "just a road trip, it's close" and it turned out to be the longest trip by car I ever had.

We just have incredibly different distances, not to mention incredibly different territory morphology, not to mention incredibly different roads and cities. Different life, different needs, therefore different cars.

It's pointless to argue which car is the best in general. I'd take a truck or muscle any day for an American road trip, but those same vehicles wouldn't even be able reach my mountain apartment.

File: daytona.jpg (77KB, 672x448px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 672x448px

>>15812233
>>Worse handling than european sports cars
Better speed than yuropean """""""""""""""""""""""""""Sports"""""""""""""""""""""""" cars.

>>Slower than european sports cars (Straight line speed means nothinh)
Literally faster than uropeein """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Sports""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" cars
>muh straight line
pic related, typical muscle cars with tuned engines averaging 115+mph holding turns one wet sand.

>>Reliable ≠ Good quality/refined. Reliability came from ancient technology and simplicity, not build quality.
>muh advanced technology
always fails. Detroit experimented with EFI in the late 50's every car was switched back to carbs because carbs go bang when you need them to.
KISS is why your shitbox Civic is still alive right now.
I've literally had a carbed car die on me on the highway. I got it idling again, put my hand over the throat and it sucked out the clog in the jets. Good as new.
The problems American cars had was missing parts, poor fitment of parts, interior leaks, etc. The drivetrains never failed unless you sent your cars to Australia when they were built for America.

yuroshit could not compete. Your dinky little two-stroke could seize at any minute back in the day.

>he needs a flywheel to coast
kek

>>15812251
>I'd take a truck or muscle any day for an American road trip, but those same vehicles wouldn't even be able reach my mountain apartment.
literally downshift.

>>15812197
>So much wrong in one post
Dear god.

>All cars were bad back then
Go try a British roadster, or, even better, a first gen SL.

>Much HP/l
Gross horsepower. Which is just a big blatant lie to attract consumers.

>Much top speed
Granny gears will do that.

>5L
How about 7?

>Aero, tires and oil caused mpg problems
No, weight and carbs did.

>Detroit muscle is indestructible
Put an Olds 455 into a boat, look what happens. You'll have an anchor pretty soon.

>>15812233
>Straight line speed means nothing
It does though. However, they offered very little beyond that.

>Implying simple = bad

musclefags btfo

>>15812255
Yeah. Sure. Downshift. Let's see how that helps through the narrow road ahead.

>>15812253
>Detroit experimented with EFI in the late 50's every car was switched back to carbs because carbs go bang when you need them to.
Not that guy, but you're pretty stupid to confuse EFI and MFI. Most of the reliability problems with MFI were caused by bad mechanics without proper training, not because the MFI units were bad. The base concept is still in use today on high-end drag cars, where EFI is either prohibited or simply can't deliver enough fuel (e.g. Top Fuel).

>>15812258
>>So much wrong in one post
nope
>Go try a British roadster, or, even better, a first gen SL.
I'm not interested in cars that fall apart so that rules out any English car.

>Which is just a big blatant lie to attract consumers.
literally lmaoing rn.
You refer to the period of time when insurance companies charged based on lap times. This didn't actually catch up to many cars and manufacturers lowered HP numbers on paper only to skirt them.

>Granny gears will do that.
You mean piles of torque will do that.
I bet you think flathead engines were slow because they had like 100hp at most while you ignore the insane torque that they generated.

>How about 7?
Big blocks were pretty rare, of course a uro wouldn't know that anyway.
>inb4 huge engine boat anchor mem
OHV small blocks are probably smaller than the 4 banger in your clapbox.

>No, weight and carbs did.

No they didn't. Aero is the same reason the Countach never achieved 200mph and while the Diablo could but they had literally the same engine.
Countach has the aerodynamics of a brick, Diablo didn't.

>Put an Olds 455 into a boat,
kek holy shit confirmed ran out of arguments. This is equivalent of "you're a fucking white male"

>>15812267
>Not that guy, but you're pretty stupid to confuse EFI and MFI.
http://www.allpar.com/cars/desoto/electrojector.html

>>15812287
Wow, not even that guy, but you are taking so much effort to defend those heavy pieces of crap. Just accept it, muscle can't compete.

>>15812316
There is no effort in being right.
You actually have to drive one to learn how they drive.
The memes of enraged euros come from a narrow picture of these cars as they were in a time when Detroit was literally in an arms race to get every last horsepower they could out of their engines. Surprisingly these cars handle pretty well with modern tires. They can even stop if throw some disc brakes on them.
Non-powered steering is something that takes practice though but by 1970 most boats had powered steering.

>>15812222
How long before it becomes undrivable? One year?

>>15812287
>not interested in cars that fall apart

Chrysler cars were famous for shit quality as far back as the 50s

>This didn't actually catch up to many cars and manufacturers lowered HP numbers on paper only to skirt them.

yeah no
most of the v8s were completely anemic

nothing like a big bad 200hp big block

a built flathead was lucky to run 16s lol

they still weigh more and no most arent smaller


American cars were shit and have been until recently

>>15812287
>SL
>British

No, I was referring to when they still advertised using gross HP, without accessories. Many manufacturers today still downgrade their engines a bit, just to make sure every single engine, no matter the production defect, passes SAE net testing.

Flatheads still don't make the torque a proper OHV can make. Flatheads are slow btw, with barely any records set over 300mph, even with modern tech.

Even in Yurop you still have big blocks, they're not rare. What is rare, however, is a 302/5.0 small block with dual quads from the factory.

I'd love to see that OHV unit that's smaller than a 1.6 I4. Sure they're smaller than most SOHC V8's, but not that small.

>Comparing Lamborghini's to muscle cars
Lel.

Olds big blocks are notorious to fail under heavy stress. Hence, the boat reference.

>>15812293
I'm pretty sure that guy was talking about MFI. Early MFI, especially in the Corvette, had a terrible reputation among US consumers (again, that's the untrained mechanics for you). Early MFI, which did exist, had no reputation at all, because it was stratospherically expensive, and had double digits production numbers. There are probably more single year fuellie 'vettes left, then how many Electrojector units were originally built.

>>15812332
That NYC salt idk nigga.

>>15812333
>Chrysler cars were famous for shit quality as far back as the 50s
Nah, they were famous for that for two model years between 1955-1957 while they were working on drastic style changes. Of course that only brought them to equivalency of GM and Ford of 1955 and 1957.
But nice meme anyway.

>most of the v8s were completely anemic

300 horsepower from a 345 with a 4 barrel carburetor and 8.5:1 squeeze is anything but anemic. 4.6 Modular is anemic but to make double what a Modular can with OHV, low compression (by modern standards), and a single 4 barrel carburetor is pretty good.
Maybe that's why Hemi is the mainstay of top fuel.
>200hp big block
There were no big blocks in the 50's. OHV had just become the standard, just replaced flatheads 331 was considered big, but then the teeny 350 SBC was built in 1955. I don't know anyone that would consider a 350 a big block.

>a built flathead was lucky to run 16s lol
Nobody was messing with flatheads by that time, only poorfaggots still bought them because they were dirt cheap in dirt cheap brands.

>they still weigh more
a 350 SBC weighs just under 600 pounds
A modern Camry engine is almost 400 pounds. That's not much difference considering one has double the cylinders and displacement.

>American cars were shit and have been until recently
Keep rationalizing your bus pass friendo.

>>15812331
>Surprisingly these cars handle pretty well with modern tires
Only if you overhaul the entire suspension system (see: Pro Touring). Bias ply suspension does not play nice with modern rubber.

>>15812373
>I'm pretty sure that guy was talking about MFI.
Yeah well i was talking about the first attempt at EFI which was a complete disaster.
http://www.allpar.com/cars/desoto/electrojector.html

>Olds big blocks are notorious to fail under heavy stress
Because big blocks are supposed to run low.

>Even in Yurop you still have big blocks, they're not rare.
Actually they kinda are since people buy them without a car to put them in.

>>15812375
no body was talking about the 50s specifically
and youre the person who brought up the Flathead stop getting mad you get your shit pushed in

but holy shit you dont know anything


the 350 didnt come out until 1967

your 345 made more like 200-225
those hemi engines weigh more than 60s big blocks

200 lbs is plenty of weight when youre not using a 2 ton shitbox

keep projecting with tryhard memes since youre ignorant on cars

>>15808159
As someone who has driven between Texas and Las Vegas 4 times (round trip), I can assure you, American muscle is not the way to go. Most comfortable journey was in a 2003 Lincoln Town Car (even without aux) for passengers, and second most as a driver. Only problem was that I was falling asleep at the wheel from the ride. Would be the best otherwise, very nice car to drive on long road trips.

2013 Buick Lacrosse was great. Loved the way it felt driving, smooth ride, quiet. I don't know how people say this is lower-end than cadillac, I liked it more.
2013 Lexus IS350 was okay, but wasn't as roomy, despite being significantly roomy already. I distinctly remember not being able to stretch my legs out all the way for a nice clean sitting-stretch when on the long drives, which made the difference.
2016 Lincoln MKX was best for me. I'm usually not a huge fan of Ford, given that Buick and Lexus are high-end and far more reliable, but Lincoln in my opinion is underrated as driver's cars. I probably liked this one the most simply because it was a huge, roomy SUV. Not a fair comparison.

>>15812375
>300hp from a 345
Gross HP, so about low 200's when actually installed, and less than 200 at the tires.

>Maybe that's why Hemis rules Top Fuel
No. Hemis run Top Fuel because of high chamber volume (which you need to reduce CR when running 60psi of boost) and, most inportantly, excellent airflow in the heads.

There were 200hp big blocks in the 70's, because US carmakers couldn't figure out how to meet emissions standards.

Displacement means nothing when you have 70's smog era power resulting from it.

>>15812388
Even under low RPM, they still can hardly meet heavy loads, which kills them.

File: Capture.png (43KB, 668x320px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 668x320px

>>15812389
>no body was talking about the 50s specifically
Except me when the muscle era began, the V8 was proven, and the big three got into a pissing match over power.
So it's only the most relevant decade.

>but holy shit you dont know anything

lmao no.

>the 350 didnt come out until 1967
Yeah whatever but even the 265 made more than 200 horsepower.

>those hemi engines weigh more than 60s big blocks
I can tell you that's bullshit because the 426 wasn't developed until the 60's. First gen Hemis are still small.

>200 lbs is plenty of weight when youre not using a 2 ton shitbox
lmao pic related

>>15812404
>Muscle era began in the 50's
Except it began in the early 60's.

>>15812401
>There were 200hp big blocks in the 70's, because US carmakers couldn't figure out how to meet emissions standards.
>cars after the oil crisis were slow
Wow, no shit. I wonder why the muscle era died in the 70's then?

>>15812406
The Olds 88 was considered the first muscle car in 1949.

>>15812404
>First gen Hemis are still small.
Noooooooooooope. Have you ever seen an early slingshot fuellie with a 392? They're huge. Basically the size of a wedge big block, maybe a bit smaller, but for a small block, they're absolutely massive. Hemis are always going to be substantially bigger then wedges (although Mopar's 3rd gen faux-Hrmi is pretty compact).

>>15812415
>Noooooooooooope. Have you ever seen an early slingshot fuellie with a 392? They're huge.
Friendly reminder that Dodge had a 241 Hemi.

>>15812404
muscle wasnt a thing until like 63 or 64

>Yeah whatever but even the 265 made more than 200 horsepower.

no
I bet the top level ones made more like 180 and maybe 130 atw

>First gen Hemis are still small.

hell no they werent

they were huge and weighed 600-800 lbs

>lmao pic related

A v6 camry makes more hp than and will outrun most muscle cars tho

>>15812418
those still weighed 650 lbs

>>15812418
Which made a whopping 140 gross HP.

>>15812421
>muscle wasnt a thing until like 63 or 64
see
>>15812413

>no
nope, 200 gross
>but it doesn't count!
Who cares lmao, just consider your shitbox engine with gross horsepower

>A v6 camry makes more hp than and will outrun most muscle cars tho
Nope and that was the 4 banger.

>>15812426
>>15812429
Still small as shit.

>>15812413
First doesn't mean the muscle car era started then. The heyday of the muscle car started in the early sixties (I'd say 1964, when the GTO launched and everyone pulled out their big guns), up until the early 70's (I'd say 1971, because net HP started then iirc).

>>15812437
Physical size is still bigger than the average small block, just shy of the average big block. Still weighed around 645 lbs

http://www.gomog.com/allmorgan/engineweights.html

>>15812430
that doesnt mean when muscle started

a V6 Camry in gross hp would probably be like 350+ lol
and no that is V6 weight a 4 cylinder is 3240-3350

they made shit power man

>>15812437
who cares when it makes less power and weighs more than the competition

>>15812438
>First doesn't mean the muscle car era started then.
Cool but that kicked off the muscle era when every manufacturer tried to one up the competition so technically it began the muscle era. Just because it doesn't look like a firebird or some shit doesn't mean it isn't a muscle car.

>>15812448
>a V6 Camry in gross hp would probably be like 350+ lol
a whopping 268 from a car that weighs as much as a 72 base Charger lmao. At some point you'll need to realize modern cars weigh as much as unibody steel landyachts.

>who cares when it makes less power and weighs more than the competition

That's why 360.

>>15812463
that goal post moving tho

yet somehow you think your 180hp v8s are impressive

the Camry runs a 14.3 @ 100 and does 0-60 in under 6 seconds

most muscle cars cant do that even the top trim 72 Charger barely broke 14s

talk about embarrasing

>>15812463
>Cool but that kicked off the muscle era when every manufacturer tried to one up the competition so technically it began the muscle era.
No. Being a muscle car does not equal starting the era. The muscle car era was when they acutally started fighitn and competing, while there were no such goals in the 1950's - it all started in the early 60's when bans on racing were lifted, and companies actively supported speed.

>At some point you'll need to realize modern cars weigh as much as unibody steel landyachts.
That's because of modenr safety regulations, not because old design is better.

>That's why 360.
How much do those weigh again? 750+ lbs iirc.

>>15812473
>that goal post moving tho
in regards to what?

>yet somehow you think your 180hp v8s are impressive
>implying i own a 180hp V8.
Take that to Panther General.

>the Camry runs a 14.3 @ 100 and does 0-60 in under 6 seconds
Nice, a 1970 Plymouth Duster does a 1/4 in 14.1 and a 0-60 of 5.7 with a 340.

>>15812477
>The muscle car era was when they acutally started fighitn and competing
so the early 50's to mid 70's like i said right?

> while there were no such goals in the 1950's
Holy fucking kek pick up a book nigger.

>That's because of modenr safety regulations, not because old design is better.
>BlOO BLOO BLOO
Old muscle car is slower because of OHV valve and 3 speed automatics not because the design is worse huh?

>How much do those weigh again? 750+ lbs iirc.

Probably one of the most acclaimed Chrysler engines only weight 550-ish pounds.

>>15812513
I didnt say you did

but youre in here defending 700 lb engines that make less than 200 hp

once again
MOST
muscle cars cant beat that

the 340 is arguably the best small block and only barely beats it out and that one is using what 3.91 or 4.11 gears?

>>15812533
>but youre in here defending 700 lb engines that make less than 200 hp
Because they don't weigh 700 pounds and they make much more than 200hp. Once again you're thinking of the 4.5 modular, the very example of what you're saying.

>MOST

But the Duster was still slower than FULL SIZE SEDANS with big blocks.
and then they gave the Duster the 360, even better.

I've not said Muscle cars are better than modern cars but they are in no way slow when certain muscle cars can outrun certain modern cars.
I'd ask you to go full WOT in any muscle car.

>only barely beats it out and that one is using what 3.91 or 4.11 gears?

You mean doing so from the 3 speed 60's era inefficient automatic transmission? Yes i think 4.11.

>>15812390
>2013 Buick Lacrosse was great. Loved the way it felt driving, smooth ride, quiet. I don't know how people say this is lower-end than cadillac, I liked it more.
Me neither anon, I look at the interiors and the Buick is a lot more understated and classy. Cadillac got blacked, sadly.

>>15812615
>Because they don't weigh 700 pounds and they make much more than 200hp.

yes they do and no they dont

a 4.6 weighs less than every engine youve talked about too

nope
most of those cars were slow af

>1968 Chevrolet Impala SS427 (MT)
427ci/385hp, 3spd auto, 2.73, 0-60 - 7.0, 1/4 mile - 15.40 @ 90mph

>1971 Pontiac Lemans GT-37 (HR)
400ci/300hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.40 @ 97.50mph

>1970 Chrysler 300-Hurst (CL)
440ci/375hp, 3spd auto, 3.23, 0-60 - 7.1, 1/4 mile - 15.30 @ 94.93mph

muscle cars are slow
there is no ifs and buts about it
the only exception are top of the line big block cars

>>15812646
Are those era lap times? Because tires have evolved.

>>15812657
thats not a valid excuse

F.A.S.T use period style tires and run sub 10s

muscle cars are slow

File: download.jpg (9KB, 297x170px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 297x170px

>>15808159

It is painfully obvious that you have never done that either.

Driving on straight roads in an uncomfortable slow and noisy car is not enjoyable.

I'll take my mercedes thanks.

File: face-with-tears-of-joy.png (58KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 256x256px

>>15812646
>yes they do
nope

>a 4.6 weighs less than every engine youve talked about too
nope

>most of those cars were slow af
nope

>427ci/385hp, 3spd auto, 2.73, 0-60 - 7.0, 1/4 mile - 15.40 @ 90mph
440 Cuda did 5.0 0-60 13.8 1/4. If you're going to post about cars leave GM out of it.

>muscle cars are slow
lmao nope

Do you even have any real arguments?

>>15812662
This delusion

>>15812678
and now hes got to the point where I pushed his shit in so far its seeped into his brain and all he can manage is shitposting

muscle cars are slow no matter how much you like them

>>15808159
>silence
>elegance

Dude you've obviously never owned it driven a sportier German car from ~pre-2005, brands like BMW haven't always been obsessed with killing the driver experience, that starter only a few years ago.

>>15812692
How can i argue with someone who has a rock for a brain?
Anyway post your car btw

>>15812704
I'm sensing "I spent all my McDonalds wage on a car with a bigger engine than yours, therefore I win the argument USA USA USA".

>>15812719
post car inb4 Greyhound

>>15812737
What does it have to do with the discussion?

File: 1471816062267.jpg (2MB, 4083x2301px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4083x2301px

>>15812741
Because you're probably 100% bitter that your shitbox is inferior to a 40-50 year old car.

Post car faqqot what's the problem? If it was a decent car you'd be happy to post it huh?

>>15812633
Buick is also more reliable, and it seems like more effort is put into build and design quality than Cadillac. Buick is like Cadillac for white people.

>>15812749
Different anon here, not getting in an argument because I drive a town car anyway, but there's no way that's yours. Timestamp or gtfo.

File: 2017-Buick-LaCrosse-interior-e1438940104622.jpg (65KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 640x400px

>>15812753
>Buick is like Cadillac for white people.
I like this definition lol. Fucking niggers ruined Cadillac. They're all gaudy bling now and the design language is shit.

File: 1972_00009_01.jpg (88KB, 760x457px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 760x457px

>>15812758
No shit it's not mine but it's nice looking regardless.

File: interior_1.jpg (233KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 900x600px

>>15812780
Now look at the shit tier caddy.

>>15810601
Bump 4 reminder

I'm surprised you guys aren't shitting up this thread: >>15802084

>>15812975
because thats a muscle thread
not a thread pretending muscle cars are great

>>15808159
But then, neither have 99.9% of the people who love muscle cars.

I think they look and sound beautiful, but they're awful, awful cars. Especially old ones.

>>15808174
They're fun no matter who you are. They're just only practical if you're rich.

>>15808189
Some. I recently took a week off work and did about 1400 miles around Scotland and England.
I covered a good chunk of the country, and ran out of patience with scottish roads, speed cameras, and drivers.
WONDERFUL roads, ruined by average speed check cameras, and speed cameras. It's a scottish thing; the speed cameras suddenly stopped on the road I was following back down to England, and I was able to put on 10MPH instantly.
Not that the road could take much more, because of all the twisties and bumps and going through small villages.

>>15810585
But not usually by car, because if you park a nice northern european car in southern/eastern europe, you'll never see it again.

>>15813304
>They're fun no matter who you are.

not really

muscle cars are lowest common denominator cars

anyone with skill or class wont have fun with them

had more fun with a 100hp Civic than I did a 400hp big block

>>15813322
Probably because you never touched a 400hp big block.

File: Screenshot_9.png (2MB, 1050x608px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1050x608px

>>15808159
>your jap car can do hektik skids but no chick wants to be in it
oh but you're wrong

>>15813327
musclefags are always deluded to the point of hilarity then again it goes with that lowest common denominator label

theyre fucking awful cars

>>15813343
You've never touched a 400hp big block.

>>15813359
That's almost stock rating lol.

>>15813359
:eyeroll

>>15813362
Doesn't matter, he's never even laid a finger on one.

as you can tell by the reddit tier post here
>>15813364

>>15813362
yes

it was an L36 427 with a few mods

it drove like a boat

>>15813373
:eyeroll

so fucking tryhard

just because youre a kid whos never even touched any car doesnt mean the rest of the world hasnt

I grew up around muscle cars in the south

>>15813383
k, keep the dream alive busrider.

>>15813390
:eyeroll

>old european cars
>classy, incredibly reliable, comfortable
>old american cars
>999 liters 100 horsepower V8, loud, shitty ass 3 gear automatic

>>15808159

Until you get into a minor car accident and die.

>>15812390

The new Lacrosse seems really nice. GM should give it the Voltec treatment like they did to the CT6.

>>15808159
I think I would also need a blonde