There are many different definitions of musclecar (see the two word spelling: muscle car). Common elements are
American + 2 door + V8 + rear wheel drive. Some people even add a date/time/year element (silly, I think). Some people add a price element, ie, a musclecar provides good power at an affordable price, whereas a supercar provides good power, but is very expensive.
I propose that a musclecar is simply any car with muscle, ie, a good power-to-weight ratio. I suggest 10 pounds or less per horsepower. Therefore, a MINIMUM requirement would be:
2,000 lbs. = 200+ hp.
3,000 lbs. = 300+ hp.
To go with the economy idea, say $100 per hp. Therefore, the 2,000 lb., 200 hp car would cost $20,000. The 3,000 lb., 300 hp car would cost $30,000. Unfortunately, the $ amounts would have to be adjusted with inflation.
American + 2 door + V8 + rear wheel drive. Some people even add a date/time/year element (silly, I think). Some people add a price element, ie, a musclecar provides good power at an affordable price, whereas a supercar provides good power, but is very expensive.
I propose that a musclecar is simply any car with muscle, ie, a good power-to-weight ratio. I suggest 10 pounds or less per horsepower. Therefore, a MINIMUM requirement would be:
2,000 lbs. = 200+ hp.
3,000 lbs. = 300+ hp.
To go with the economy idea, say $100 per hp. Therefore, the 2,000 lb., 200 hp car would cost $20,000. The 3,000 lb., 300 hp car would cost $30,000. Unfortunately, the $ amounts would have to be adjusted with inflation.
Maybe we could come up with a definition that does NOT need modification with time, rating the musclecar as a percentile of the new car population available that year.
We could say the 0-60 and quarter mile times must be better than 75% of the other new cars available that year.
We could say the price should be less than 10% above the average price of a new car that year. We could reserve "supercar" for more expensive cars, and raise the performance parameters to 90%+.
We could say the 0-60 and quarter mile times must be better than 75% of the other new cars available that year.
We could say the price should be less than 10% above the average price of a new car that year. We could reserve "supercar" for more expensive cars, and raise the performance parameters to 90%+.
by Jeff Goven July 2, 2006
Get the musclecar mug.The kind of car that just blew your doors off. Why all the muscle car bashing? Have you ever owned one? driven one? I doubt it. Muscle cars were built from about 1964 to 1972. Camaros and Mustangs are not muscle cars, they are generally refered to as pony cars. Muscle cars are mid sized cars with large displacement engines. A muscle car in the truest sense is a big block V8 car. A muscle car can't have a 6 cylinder and be a true muscle car, even if it is the same body style. Just because you drive a pile of import crap doesn't mean you should bad mouth real pieces of automotive history. They were built decades ago and are still faster and worth more than your import car. Exhaust tips, graphics, stereo systems and spoilers don't make your car faster. You think trailer trash drive muscle cars? Have you seen the prices of muscle cars lately? Many are worth far more than the house you live in.
by My name none of your business July 8, 2006
Get the muscle car mug.My 1970 Pontiac Firebird Formula 400 with a 461 and 519hp will KILL any import on the Road today and for the rest of my life.
by John Perry December 20, 2003
Get the muscle cars mug.by not a 4 banger September 11, 2003
Get the muscle car mug.A slang term for a beer belly. Your stomach muscles have been transformed by beer (Molson) into a protruding stomach.
by SoupNotSee November 10, 2010
Get the molson muscle mug.Overpriced? In 1969, your average 17 year-old American kid who just finished high-school and works full-time at a hamburger stand could afford a Plymouth Road Runner. Even with insurance, gas, and tires, he could afford. This is an actual fact, BTW. A '69 383-powered RR, with cold-air induction, a 4-speed, and good weather could do 0-60 in 6 seconds a pull all the way to 130mph on 60's tech bias-ply tires. Complete with an unsilenced air cleaner and low-restriction dual exhaust, a special performance cam and high-flow cylinder heads.For an extra $714 he could get his/herself a 426 Hemi, with state-of-the-art (at least, at the time)techonology. Starting with dual quads flowing about 1300cfm total, mounted on an aluminum intake manifold, with a cast-iron block and cast-iron cylinder heads. Everything was shot-peened and magnafluxed, and when the whole thing was hand-assembled by expert mechanics, it was also fully balanced-and-blueprinted. Header-like exhaust manifolds were used, with 2.5" tubing. Mandrel bends? Sorry, the technology for that didn't exist in the late '60s, whether it was a cheap economical Ford, or a $20k Ferrari. BTW, Race Hemi's had single 4-bbl. carbs mounted on magnesium intakes, with aluminum heads and 12.5:1 (vs. 10.25:1) compression pistons. It is estimated that an A-990 426c.i. Race Hemi produced about 600hp & 550ft-lbs of torque at the crank. This is gross, however since there was no emmissions equipment, no A/C, power steering, and 95% of the time, a 4-speed stick, net ratings wouldn't be much different from the gross ones. Maybe -5% or something. -10%, tops. Anyway, old-school muscle cars were not ugly (that is a matter of opinion), are cheap (worth $10's to $100k's now), and were very durable and reliable. Fuel-efficient? No. Enviroment-friendly? No. But neither were Euro sports cars of the day, either, so you can't complain. There suspensions, well, I can't say they were great, but they certainly weren't bad. You try taking any '60s-engineered car with a purposely stiff suspension (designed for minimal body roll and maximum traction) off-road for 10 minutes. NO MATTER WHAT it is, your back will be hurting. Maybe mure in a competition-spec '65 Cobra 427 then in a luxury Lincoln sedan, but still. If real race cars were fuel-efficient and softly-suspended like you wanted them to be, they'd still be pushing along at 100mph and leaning side-to-side every time you turned the wheel. Polyurethane bushings didn't exhist in the '60s. BTW, most old Road Runner's or GTO's woudl smoke a Ferrari 365GTB/4 Daytona at the drag strip, or even a NASCAR superspeedway for that matter. Not on a road course, no, but FYI most '60s NASCAR musclecars could do 190mph. Some, like the '70 Plymouth Superbird could do 220mph. Not bad for the day. Anyway, the point is, you;re a jerk, Gumba Gumba, and doesn't know anything about '60s cars, whether performance or luxury-oriented, whether domestic or imported.
American Muscle vs. Euro Road Racers
1970 Plymouth Duster 340
A/C, AM/FM radio, vinyl buckets, auto tranny
0-60 in 6 seconds, 130mph top speed
1970 Dodge Charger R/T
Heater, AM radio, vinyl buckets, 4-speed stick
0-60 in under 6.5 seconds, ~140mph top speed
1970 Ferrari 365GTB/4 Daytona
Dunno what options, probably leather and crap
0-60 in 6 seconds, 170mph top speed
So basically, $20k Ferrari Daytona has acceleration equal to that of a $2.5k Duster 340. The Dusters 5.6l V8 makes about 310hp, whereas the Ferrari makes 352. Nevermind that the Ferrari has 4 more cylinders, 4 cams, 6 carbs, and all that. It has 1.2-liters less displacemen. The only reason it can do 170 is 'cause of the 5-speed and really steep gears. Give it 3.91 gears like a Duster, and voila! The top speed goes down by 10mph. 0-60 acceleration would go down by about 3/10th's of a second. Git rid of the 5th gear, and in combination with the 3.91 gears, you get the same acceleratio and top speed as a Duster, only for $17k more, and with less stash space and worse fuel-economy. All for 4-wheel disc brakes. Whoop-dee do.
1970 Plymouth Duster 340
A/C, AM/FM radio, vinyl buckets, auto tranny
0-60 in 6 seconds, 130mph top speed
1970 Dodge Charger R/T
Heater, AM radio, vinyl buckets, 4-speed stick
0-60 in under 6.5 seconds, ~140mph top speed
1970 Ferrari 365GTB/4 Daytona
Dunno what options, probably leather and crap
0-60 in 6 seconds, 170mph top speed
So basically, $20k Ferrari Daytona has acceleration equal to that of a $2.5k Duster 340. The Dusters 5.6l V8 makes about 310hp, whereas the Ferrari makes 352. Nevermind that the Ferrari has 4 more cylinders, 4 cams, 6 carbs, and all that. It has 1.2-liters less displacemen. The only reason it can do 170 is 'cause of the 5-speed and really steep gears. Give it 3.91 gears like a Duster, and voila! The top speed goes down by 10mph. 0-60 acceleration would go down by about 3/10th's of a second. Git rid of the 5th gear, and in combination with the 3.91 gears, you get the same acceleratio and top speed as a Duster, only for $17k more, and with less stash space and worse fuel-economy. All for 4-wheel disc brakes. Whoop-dee do.
by Dude1Dude2 November 16, 2005
Get the American Muscle mug.The participants of stupid and dangerous acts of male bravado are often aided in these acts by their beer muscle
by Anon October 19, 2004
Get the beer muscle mug.