No editorial comment here at all.
Got my latest issue of Muscle Car Review today and they listed the Top 10 Muscle Cars according to a fairly exhaustive review of contemporary road tests of the Muscle Car Era.

1. 66 427 Cobra 12.20 @ 118
2. 66 427 Corvette 12.80 @ 112
3. 69 440 Road Runner 12.91 @ 111
4. 69 396 CamaroSS 13.00 @ 108
5. 70 426 Hemi Cuda 13.10 @ 107
6. 70 454 ChevelleSS 13.12 @ 107
7. 69 427 ZL1 Camaro 13.16 @ 110
8. 68 427 Vette 13.30 @ 108
9. 70 429 CobraJet 13.30 @ 106
10. 70 426 Road Runner 13.34 @ 107

With all due respect to the really great cars of that era, and I still own a 69 Chev BelAir 427/390 that I love, I do believe that Lightnings are pretty solid candidates for the Fastest (whatever) Hall of Fame.

Sorry for some editorial comment that I was not going to put in, but our Bolts are not only a pickup as opposed to a coupe, but we have all the bells and whistles those cars did not have such as A/C, Power everything, leather upholstery, radio/cd player etc.

Damn, it's hard to be humble, ain't it.

Bill

------------------
99.5 Lightning
Build #247
PSP Chip/Filter
Bassani full system
White/normal options
Tamiya 1/10 scale Bolt
Several old trucks/cars
Thunder & Lightning
Rag Doll Cats
E-mail MOSTOYSINC@AOL.com
Kennesaw, Ga. (Atlanta)

 

Great list, Bill. I am shocked that the 396SS Camaro was that quick.

Also, isn't that a 428CJ Mustang, instead of a 429? I guess the Boss 429 just missed the cut.

Your'e right, cars & trucks have gotten so much better, but rowing the gears on a big block muscle car or high winding solid lifter small block was a lot of fun back then. Come to think of it, it still is!

 

Plus, it`s always good to remember, the cars which made that list were almost certainly very highly tuned examples due to being magazine test cars. Kinda like if SVT sent out a test Lightning with a chip and filter already installed...

 

Those cars also had the benefit of high compression and 104 octane gas at .35 a gallon. I'm going to see what 104 octane gas at $5.00 a gallon does to my times on the 30th!
Noelvm

 

They also had the disadvantage of some of the worst tires and trannys (by todays standards) that money could buy. those times are better than i've ever seen for "any" of those models, unless they were run on modern rubber.

 

bad transmissions??????The M-22 Muncie rock crusher 4-speed with a Hurst shifter combined with someone with a enough ***** to power shift it was and is one hell of a transmission.
Noelvm
Tires were bad.

 

i was speaking of the auto/efficiency compared to what you and i are driving. you could not order a Muncie with all 10 of those models. a Muncie felt like a nitrous shot when you hammered it. i had one in an old camaro 396 (rust bucket). when i shifted 1-2 i'd lose 2-3lbs of car. , hellofva tranny

 

Not to get into a pissing contest here, but:
Of the 10 cars, nine were manuals, one was a torqueflite.
Rear axle ratios were as follows.
3.36 (1)
3.54/3.55(3)
3.70 (1)
4.10 (3)
4.30 (1)
4.88 (1)
Other than the fastest Cobra,a Shelby, all were on the lousy street tires of the day according to the pictures.
It was mentioned at least once that the cars were "specially tuned", which was not unusual in those days.

Again, I respect all of these vehicles, I grew up with them. I still think, though, that a Bolt is really in a league of it's own considering many of you can run in the low 13's with no real special tuning or power adders. Remember, a chip of today was not necessary in the '60s in terms of shift firmness and rpm at shift. Air cleaners were as efficient or more so than our modified ones of today. Exhaust systems were probably equal stock for stock and I gather we don't gain all that much with our Bassani/Borla/whatever combos we have been installing.

Not trying to gloat, really, just not being too humble either.
Bill

 

huh, I raced a 69 SS a few weeks ago and beat him fair and square. Looked like it was in real good condition too.

Mike

 

Would you consider the GT-40 a muscle car? If not I just need to say that it is a reallllly cool car!!!

 

saw an article in Mopar Muscle a few months back. a new viper gts vs a factory "lightweight" belvadere (hideous looking thing), cept for it's aluminum construction and tweaked 426 hemi under hood. anyway, they had to sell so many of these to the public, so they could race with them, like they were a std model. they gave the belvadere the exact tires as the stock GTS, and the GTS lost 12.2 to 11.90

 

Noelvm,

Depending on how much gas you leave in your tank I would suggest to only add 1 to 2 gallons of the 104 Octane.

The L' is not designed to handle the 104 octane and it would not burn as efficiently and may even slow you down some. Generaly I only keep approximatly 5 to 6 gallons of the 93 octane pump gas running on the track and when I got a bit more serious I would add a gallon of the 104 stuff. I could then bump my timing up more without any detonation, this was with my '94 Lightning.

Anyway for what it's worth....
___________________________________________
Those cars also had the benefit of high>compression and 104 octane gas at .35 a
gallon. I'm going to see what 104 octane gas at $5.00 a gallon does to my times on the 30th!
____________________________________________

------------------
John Armstrong

2000 Red Lightning