a typical car where young naive, lost, cocky, white boys would drive not knowing shit about cars, and thinks their cars the shit just becuase it beat some riced out import and would get all excited about beating it, thus thinking all imports are crap. well, the sad thing is muscle car fans out there u gotta be joking with ur tin can piece of crap, ugly, unreliable, muscle cars, cuz any import around the same price range will kill it either in the straight away or the curves. actually it doesnt even have to be on the same price range, and would still beat it.
all you dumbass white boys think honda civics, and accords are the only imports out their but think again. there are many imports that can beat mustangs, camaros, transams, and even corvettes with some mods. and we're only talking about the straights.
some ex will be:(evo9,sti,350z,s2000,type s,skyline,supra twin turbo,wrx,) so many more to name. and note all these cars with only 2000-3000 dollars in mods or even less will kill all muscle cars.
an evo9 or sti with just a reflash will kill mustangs, transams, and camaros on the drag. so you muscles fans out their just admit it that ur cars suck dick. not even white girls like it. too bad all the chicks dig imports. another plus side is that it has style, quality, fuel efficient, light, chick magnets, and handles million times better.
i own a sti and spent only 2300 dollars in mods which includes( vishnu stage 1, used hks turbo back, manual boost control, and a used down pipe) and beat a 2006 corvette by one car length, which cost almost twice as much even with all the mods. thats pretty sad you muscle car fans, isnt it. and the conclusion is this if i can beat a corvette then i can beat about 90% of all muscles cars. so dont even argue any more aiite. its over. nothing to argue about. muscles cars suck no matter what. its the fact. aiite payce.
all you dumbass white boys think honda civics, and accords are the only imports out their but think again. there are many imports that can beat mustangs, camaros, transams, and even corvettes with some mods. and we're only talking about the straights.
some ex will be:(evo9,sti,350z,s2000,type s,skyline,supra twin turbo,wrx,) so many more to name. and note all these cars with only 2000-3000 dollars in mods or even less will kill all muscle cars.
an evo9 or sti with just a reflash will kill mustangs, transams, and camaros on the drag. so you muscles fans out their just admit it that ur cars suck dick. not even white girls like it. too bad all the chicks dig imports. another plus side is that it has style, quality, fuel efficient, light, chick magnets, and handles million times better.
i own a sti and spent only 2300 dollars in mods which includes( vishnu stage 1, used hks turbo back, manual boost control, and a used down pipe) and beat a 2006 corvette by one car length, which cost almost twice as much even with all the mods. thats pretty sad you muscle car fans, isnt it. and the conclusion is this if i can beat a corvette then i can beat about 90% of all muscles cars. so dont even argue any more aiite. its over. nothing to argue about. muscles cars suck no matter what. its the fact. aiite payce.
american muscle: hey wanna race gotta corvette, and i bet i can toy with ur little toy.
stier: ok no problem lets see what u can do you little american muscle boy.( vroom, tires screechh and sti takes off)
american muscle: oh shit where did that lil car go. oh dam its already at the drive thru at mcdonalds. wtf...
stier: ok no problem lets see what u can do you little american muscle boy.( vroom, tires screechh and sti takes off)
american muscle: oh shit where did that lil car go. oh dam its already at the drive thru at mcdonalds. wtf...
by muscle fan August 18, 2006
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 4, 2005
Truly the Cars of the gods, More Based on Torque than HP, More on Performance than looks, Car that every true auto fan should have. They are loud but that shows how strong it is. Cons are it a gas chugger.
by rocko March 28, 2004
I beg to difer that american muscle is rubbish.....yes they would be beaten but that is duw to the fact that the 69 mustang corvette etc are 35 years old.
a muscle car...if tuned correctly can sometmes excede 2000 bhp at the crank.
If you have ever seen a proo street muscle car you would understand that it is not driven to beat civics....the car of ricers but to destroy everything on the street
a muscle car...if tuned correctly can sometmes excede 2000 bhp at the crank.
If you have ever seen a proo street muscle car you would understand that it is not driven to beat civics....the car of ricers but to destroy everything on the street
by anon March 30, 2004
The definition of perfection! Even 35+ years old they can still beat the shit out of most cars today. Mainly designed to pulverize all cars on a drag race type run.
American muscle are very powerful, while thier gas mileage and cornering arent too great. Thier power and originality make up for all else. BOW DOWN TO AMERICAN MUSCLE YOU JAPANESE CAR LOSERS!!!
American muscle are very powerful, while thier gas mileage and cornering arent too great. Thier power and originality make up for all else. BOW DOWN TO AMERICAN MUSCLE YOU JAPANESE CAR LOSERS!!!
by James Lowe March 13, 2005
Cars designed (usually) with big or small-block V8s. Today, mostly small-block. American muscle cars are commonly found to have high amounts of torque, and moderate to high horsepower WITHOUT tuning. Oftentimes, they aren't quite as expensive as their well-known nemesis, the import tuner (or rice rocket), which commonly features a four-cylinder engine, built up with all kinds of "technology" (i.e. turbo chargers, nitrous, etc.) to make up for its shortcomings to any American muscle car.
American muscle is sometimes found equipped with a "supercharger," which can give them far more horsepower and torque than their counterpart, the turbocharger, commonly used by imports, which can cost even more than a supercharger, and is also known to be nowhere nearly as reliable.
It should also be noted: American muscle is very easy to spot (and hear) on the highway. It is often associated with a deep, rumbling exhaust sound, as opposed to the annoying, high-pitched wail commonly produced by the imports' four-bangers. American muscle is also noted for not needing any sort of body modifications (i.e. tail lights, body kits, huge aluminum spoilers, etc.) to make it look fast and aggressive.
When properly modified and built, an American muscle car will easily match or outperform any tuned import. It's also worth noting that bone stock American muscle cars can often outrun highly modified import cars, and have even been known to ruin highly sought-after imports such as Lancer Evo9s and Subaru WRX-STIs.
Many myths surround American muscle cars, which can commonly be dismissed. One example is the theory that American muscle is a poor-handling vehicle. While this may have been true in the early years of muscle, this is a common misconception now, as many of the modern American muscle cars, such as the late Pontiac Trans Am have a wide stance, and a stiff, sport-tuned suspension, which stops excessive roll, allowing for a well-balanced turn when driven PROPERLY.
Another common misconception is that American muscle is the only gas-guzzling vehicle around. This is to the contrary, as a twin turboed four-banger import will do just as badly on gas mileage due to the excess draw on gas to pull more power from the weak four cylinder engine.
Also to note is gear ratios: many imports have very small gear ratios, which allow for high acceleration, but no top-end speed. Many American muscle cars on the other hand, have large gear ratios, which allow for decent acceleration, and a very high top-end speed.
These large gear ratios are possible due to the high amounts of horsepower and torque produced by an American muscle car's engine. On the contrary, many imports have small gear ratios in order to accelerate without any torque or horsepower to boot.
Finally, to drive an American muscle car, one must be truly experienced at driving. Any scrawny, acne-ridden teenage kid can jump behind the wheel of his Eclipse and pretend he can drive. However, with some talent and driving practice, any American muscle car can be taken to the next level, and prove for good which car is truly the top choice.
American muscle is sometimes found equipped with a "supercharger," which can give them far more horsepower and torque than their counterpart, the turbocharger, commonly used by imports, which can cost even more than a supercharger, and is also known to be nowhere nearly as reliable.
It should also be noted: American muscle is very easy to spot (and hear) on the highway. It is often associated with a deep, rumbling exhaust sound, as opposed to the annoying, high-pitched wail commonly produced by the imports' four-bangers. American muscle is also noted for not needing any sort of body modifications (i.e. tail lights, body kits, huge aluminum spoilers, etc.) to make it look fast and aggressive.
When properly modified and built, an American muscle car will easily match or outperform any tuned import. It's also worth noting that bone stock American muscle cars can often outrun highly modified import cars, and have even been known to ruin highly sought-after imports such as Lancer Evo9s and Subaru WRX-STIs.
Many myths surround American muscle cars, which can commonly be dismissed. One example is the theory that American muscle is a poor-handling vehicle. While this may have been true in the early years of muscle, this is a common misconception now, as many of the modern American muscle cars, such as the late Pontiac Trans Am have a wide stance, and a stiff, sport-tuned suspension, which stops excessive roll, allowing for a well-balanced turn when driven PROPERLY.
Another common misconception is that American muscle is the only gas-guzzling vehicle around. This is to the contrary, as a twin turboed four-banger import will do just as badly on gas mileage due to the excess draw on gas to pull more power from the weak four cylinder engine.
Also to note is gear ratios: many imports have very small gear ratios, which allow for high acceleration, but no top-end speed. Many American muscle cars on the other hand, have large gear ratios, which allow for decent acceleration, and a very high top-end speed.
These large gear ratios are possible due to the high amounts of horsepower and torque produced by an American muscle car's engine. On the contrary, many imports have small gear ratios in order to accelerate without any torque or horsepower to boot.
Finally, to drive an American muscle car, one must be truly experienced at driving. Any scrawny, acne-ridden teenage kid can jump behind the wheel of his Eclipse and pretend he can drive. However, with some talent and driving practice, any American muscle car can be taken to the next level, and prove for good which car is truly the top choice.
True American Muscle:
Chevelle SS, Mustang, Saleen, Camaro (Iroc-Z, Z28, SS), Firebird (Formula, Trans Am), Corvette, GTO, Charger, Shelby, etc.
Chevelle SS, Mustang, Saleen, Camaro (Iroc-Z, Z28, SS), Firebird (Formula, Trans Am), Corvette, GTO, Charger, Shelby, etc.
by WhyTellYou March 22, 2008
American cars with large engines produced between the 60's to the late 70's. Although many American car manufacturs claim that they are producing or have produced "muscle" cars is the center of much debate. Modern day Corvettes, GTO's, and Vipers are argued to be the "modern day muscle" cars.
American mucsle cars are considered the first "ricer" cars of their time. They were loud, relativley inefficient, status symbols, and not well rounded performers. Regardless, they were very fast and still hold their own against the more modern day performers.
American "muscle" car owners and enthusiasts often despise and put down the Japanese and European car manufacturers. This feud has derived from a bitterness of introducing Japanese and Euro compacts in the states during the late 70's. These cars, often much lighter and easy to modify started out performing the "muscle" cars on the drag strip.
American mucsle cars are considered the first "ricer" cars of their time. They were loud, relativley inefficient, status symbols, and not well rounded performers. Regardless, they were very fast and still hold their own against the more modern day performers.
American "muscle" car owners and enthusiasts often despise and put down the Japanese and European car manufacturers. This feud has derived from a bitterness of introducing Japanese and Euro compacts in the states during the late 70's. These cars, often much lighter and easy to modify started out performing the "muscle" cars on the drag strip.
American muscle cars are dumb cars, they accomplish straight line performance on a clean drag strip.
Import cars are smart cars, they utilize the latest technologies and materials to maximize performance without sacrificing reliability.
Import cars are smart cars, they utilize the latest technologies and materials to maximize performance without sacrificing reliability.
by david c May 2, 2006