S4 (B6 & B7 Platforms) Discussion Discussion forum for the B6 Audi S4 produced from 2003-2005 And B7 Audi S4 produced from 2005 -2008

B6S4 vs. '60's musclecars - interesting comparisons

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-18-2003, 07:14 PM
  #1  
AudiWorld Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
DMoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 772
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default B6S4 vs. '60's musclecars - interesting comparisons

For those few of us old enough to remember the late '60's and early '70's musclecars, I found a very interesting website which lists 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for lots of the old cars.

http://corvettepictures.com/1968musclecars.htm

I was really impressed by the realization that my Avant, with air conditioning, power everything, great comfort and the ability to stop AND go around corners, is almost identical in 0-60 to a 1968 Hemi Road Runner! All that with 256 cubic inches (4.2L) compared to 425's, 440's and 454's in the old days.

Although we may not think the B5S4 gets the best gas mileage, I bet it's double to triple what the monster motors of old got. (Of course, gas was $0.35/gal.)

DMoore
'04 S4 Avant
Old 10-18-2003, 07:16 PM
  #2  
AudiWorld Super User
 
JDBlueAudiS4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 17,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default There is no replacement...

for displacement.... Give me NA anyday.
Old 10-18-2003, 08:22 PM
  #3  
gk1
AudiWorld Super User
 
gk1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NJ->CO
Posts: 8,706
Received 517 Likes on 452 Posts
Default Funny. I actually have a '68 Firebird.

Not stock. 383ci. 1/4 is 13.0s@104mph (no slicks)
You're right about all the nice comforts of modern cars though.
Old 10-18-2003, 08:38 PM
  #4  
Member
 
AlanL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 6,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default It's pretty easy to let your mind drift to those cars when you are listening to the V8 rumble.

I got my drivers license back in the mid 60's and recall those cars well.

BTW - gas was closer to $0.25/gal. Adjusted for inflation, it really wasn't as cheap as it sounds.
Old 10-19-2003, 08:26 AM
  #5  
Member
 
Audi Dudey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 3,427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Not only that, but the 60s muscle cars

didn't brake as well, didn't handle as well, had poorer high speed stability, were less safe (no airbags, less rollover protection, etc.), had plugs that fouled and distributor caps and points and condenser that needed to be replaced, carburetors that had various and sundry problems (clogged jets, stuck floats, stuck chokes, etc.), often had valves that needed to be adjusted, and had lousy all weather capability. But they did sound great and with the right tires and some cheap mods, could haul a** at a drag strip.
Old 10-19-2003, 08:44 AM
  #6  
Member
 
AlanL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 6,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default There were big HP gains from cheap mods because the engines were so inefficient.

All you had to do was head down to your local parts store and get a bigger carb and more open exhaust and the gains were huge. Not hard to do when the OEM tuning was so primitive in those days.

Of course changing your exhaust manifold was a far more tempting task back then because you could do it from an open hood with the engine still in place. I don't even think I could get my hand down past the sides of the engine block in my Avant.

When you look are the engineering in our 4.2 block, it's hard to get those levels of easy mod gains because Audi has taken it so far down the path already.
Old 10-19-2003, 08:47 AM
  #7  
Junior Member
 
BiggerTwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default My 69 Grand Prix would do 0-60 in 7 seconds, which was very fast at the time.

I remember using most of that power on a highway exit ramp to catch up to a girl on a parallel ramp and scaring myself half to death since the suspension couldn't keep up with the engine.

No matter how rose colored your glasses about the 60's muscle cars, these are the good old days when it comes to cars. My friend's 68 427 Corvette couldn't hold a candle to a modern car; though it never lost a stoplight race and was like a magnet for meeting girls. I have many fond memories of the Pontiac and Chevy but I am happy I don't have to drive one today.

Alan
Old 10-19-2003, 09:11 AM
  #8  
Member
 
AlanL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 6,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default No arguments on those points at all. Muscle cars had no finese whatever in a turn.

Turns were something you did at the end of the strip.
Old 10-19-2003, 01:21 PM
  #9  
Member
 
Ron O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Got to rmember that the Corvette engine in my 62 &63 Corvettes was

327 cu " This was rated at 250 Hp & 300 Hp from the factory.. The thing to remember is that the 327ci = 5.4 L.. The torque was HUGE. This gave us the POP I and others keep talking about that we with 4.2 don't have
Old 10-19-2003, 02:39 PM
  #10  
Junior Member
 
BiggerTwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Horsepower in those days was rated at the crank, not rear wheels.

I also recall exhaust systems, alternators and other things weren't attached to the engine when they measured power. The same engine tested today would yield a lower number so you can't directly compare the numbers of the 60's with the way they measure horsepower today.

Despite these differences, the muscle cars of the 60's really pushed you back in the seat when you stepped on the gas. I know I have owned quite a few cars faster than my friend's 427 Corvette but none have left such an impression on me. Of course, being 17 and getting to ride shotgun in the newest and hottest car around made it all the more special.

Alan


Quick Reply: B6S4 vs. '60's musclecars - interesting comparisons



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:34 AM.