HEYYYOOOO

not true anymore. sorry.

Maybe stock 305's....mine is far from stock. I mean I know it's no LS1, but my car still holds its own well enough. Like I said, I beat the 4 cyl cars out there, even a few V6's. I never claimed I had a chance with any REAL sports cars...

P.S. I didn't mean to start a flame thread here btw. I just enjoy racing cars that I know I will beat. It's not like I'm going to any serious races or anything, just launching off red lights to pass annoying kids who think they're cool in their shitty cars with new mufflers. I know third gen camaro 305's are slow...not trying to fight that point. One thing I will say in my defense is my 305 is FAR from stock. One of these days I'll get around to building a 350 and dropping it in my car, THEN I'll be good.

No, I can still get 550+kms if I drive easy. I have to be a lot harder on the pedal just to keep up with today's flow of traffic than I did 10 years ago.

I/H/E doesn't count as "far from stock."

Alot of you guys are making unfair assessments and comparisons.
If your going to compare any 4,6 or 8 cylinder engine do so in the same generation of engineering.
IE a circa 85' 305 z28 might be a slouch now a days but it was still more powerful then a 4 cyl car of same vintage.

I agree. You have iterated exactly what I have been trying to say. This is what fuckwads like 1exotic don't seem to understand. I sure hope that in 23 years efficiency has increased to the point where they're making more power with less displacement than they were back then.

Don't generalize "4 cyl" cars. There are plenty of "4 cyl" cars which will destroy your car. What I think you mean to say is "I beat the base model econoboxes and grocery getters out there".

Edit: Fuck listen to me, I wouldn't havn't been saying shit like this 8 years ago hahaha

They're slow because of the political ideologies that were around at the time. There was a gas shortage, and people didn't want to lug around their big blocks anymore because they cost too much. Fuel was changing, and without lead they had to drop the compression ratios. Finally, emissions standards were tacked on to the point where a 400ci motor from an 81' Chevy Van would make 185hp, and 365lbs of torque. The automakers had yet to figure out how to make emissions and performance play nice together.

You bet it was.
There were a few fast cars at the time, but for the most part, the late 70's through to pretty much 1987, sucked balls for performance cars. It wasn't until the 300zx, MK3 Supra, and FC RX7 hit the market that the US makers realized people wanted speed again.

Looking at it from another perspective, although I never
lived the era, it would appear fiscal policy had a significant
part in the automotive world.

Using a fictional setting from the film "Used Cars", your
looking at a prelude to what you can say as a time when
every loan was equivalent to a credit card purchase.(Its
a very difficult film to watch but you loosen up)

It could be just a sad story of how from miners to subcontractors
to mechanics or in between how crappy things were playing catchup.
Posted via RS Mobile

fiscal policy, indeed.

I had the chance to talk to one of the old time GM engineers, and he said that they had the technology to make a car handle back in the 60's. In fact, if you look at the geometry of a 60's Cadillac, they were perfect. Those cars could handle, and would be amazing if they didn't weigh so much. The problem was, who would buy a Cadillac if the cheaper Chevy handled the same?

So they put control arms in the small, cheap cars that caused positive camber change. When getting an alignment, the owner could choose between camber and caster, but only two degrees. They gave them weaksauce drum brakes, and peg leg diffs in order to keep the cost down. And the cars drove like isht. The proof of this is with special editions like the 64' Chevelle L79, a short run of a few cars that Chevy made. GM axed the car, because at a cost of $4500, it would compete with the Vette. Fiscal policy.

Fast forward to 2010, and I want to prove that these cars can handle, using my 67'. Technology and capitalism have teamed up to provide proper geometry for these cars. Finally!

Here's a pic of my upper control arms. 7 degrees of caster, and up to 4.5 degrees of camber.
sweetness.

http://www.pro-touring.com/~andrewb/gtov2/photo68.jpg

ps: not my exact arms, just a generic pic, and that carpet is horrible!

Guys are tossing in Watt's links in the rear, one of the oldest automotive designs on the books.

http://www.gripping.dk/img/Guy_Watts_Link.jpg

And the cars are sticking to the track like modern day Corvettes.


Physics doesn't care whether the car is old or new. All physics cares about is how much tire is getting to the pavement, and how much friction is being generated at the tire. Suspension technology has always been there. It's just been waiting for tire technology to catch up.

^ applying new or racing automotive technology to old school cars significantly improves the way a 60s or 70s muscle car turns, handles, or steers, but they do not perform like modern cars. No matter what coilovers, control arms, chassis braces, etc you apply, the frame of reference is still an old flexible chassis designed in 40-50yrs ago.

Although I respect resto rods, they are what they are, old cars that drive pretty good and cost allot of money.

rd gen turbo T/As with the 3.8L buick engine are still pretty fast in stock form.

All your responses do fit into the giant 'kalidoscope'.
With the recent shake up of this particular industry, I honestly
still see a glimmer of hope for enthusiasts.

Not to put Jay Leno in the spotlight, but in a recent article
he wrote that GM should rebound especially due to the fact that
they now have an ex-engineer running the show.

Using a recent book called "Drive-What Motivates Us" by Daniel Pink,
Leno's opinion could be well supported.

Essentially, the theory works in that our human brainset works on
3 operating systems.

Motivation 1.0- we must have food, water and shelter.
Motivation 2.0- reward and punishment
Motivation 2.1?- a reward system analagous to a carrot on the stick.
Motivation 3.0 and beyond- the pure joy of performing the task.

It appears that having an "engineering" based company really should
fall into a more 'advanced' operating system.

I have to say this should for now only be applied to this industry.
I'm personally quite curious to see how the factory workers overall
health currently is and will be with such a massive collective pay cut.

I'm afraid we could lose the double meaning of Cadillac if this doesn't
work. For me it will always exist.
Posted via RS Mobile