Old muscle vs. New muscle???!?!

[smokn']

So I was just curious, why are new cars in general faster, even though the old ones often had as much, if not more ponies? i.e. 1970 chevelle ss w/ the 454(my dream car)- curb weight: 3260lbs, 450 hp, and a 0-60 of only 6.1??? that's mazda rx8 range almost?!?!!? the goat does 0-60 in 4.6 w/ 400 hp and a 3800lb curb weight. so, in general, what made the old muscle slower?

[Chevyrocker]

one word for ya. TECHNOLOGY

[camaro5]

Originally Posted by jsenn

one word for ya. TECHNOLOGY

I was going to say Technology, Technology, Technology

[MCPOAJ]

because people like to lie about older muscle cars and are jelous and give them bad rep.

[SSmoked]

the old muscle cars did have TRACTION CONTROL lol.

[TheMadHatter99]

Inefficiencies in the drive train that caused more power to be siphoned off before reaching the wheels is a big reason. Additionally you've got aerodynamic concerns and weight issues.

[DGthe3]

There are a few differences between now and then. First, hp is calculated differently now. Its net power not gross power. However, engines back then were often under rated anyway so those probably balance out. Secondly, tires have come a long way since then. Plus, there has probably been a great reduction in drive line losses over the last 40 or so years.

Also, I've heard that the Chevelle's weight was around 3500 lbs with the big block, not 3260.

[z28camaro2471]

Tires, tires, tires and exhaust.

Put slicks and headers on the good ole' muscle and they will run head to head with the new stuff. Of course they still can't stop or corner, but they'll get it done in a straight line!

[Camaro68]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

There are a few differences between now and then. First, hp is calculated differently now. Its net power not gross power. However, engines back then were often under rated anyway so those probably balance out. Secondly, tires have come a long way since then. Plus, there has probably been a great reduction in drive line losses over the last 40 or so years.

Also, I've heard that the Chevelle's weight was around 3500 lbs with the big block, not 3260.

I agree and it always go's to tech, look how far we have come with the coumputer on board. Look at the new Vette, thats just not motor
under there.

[KILLER74Z28]

Originally Posted by smokn'

So I was just curious, why are new cars in general faster, even though the old ones often had as much, if not more ponies? i.e. 1970 chevelle ss w/ the 454(my dream car)- curb weight: 3260lbs, 450 hp, and a 0-60 of only 6.1??? that's mazda rx8 range almost?!?!!? the goat does 0-60 in 4.6 w/ 400 hp and a 3800lb curb weight. so, in general, what made the old muscle slower?

That’s because the curb weight is way off. Put the car on the scale and it tips close to 4000 lbs. Back then they classified weight differently… My title on my 74 Z says its only 3300 and I know with even the mods I have done to make it lighter it's still close to 3600.

[Jay]

as other people said..... TECHNOLOGY..... which comes from devotion to R&D.

Every movement from a technical point of view in a car has improved... less grinding and rubbing at spots where it shouldn't, better fuel delivery, better suspension, better air flow/exhausts, aerodynamics, more electrical devices on board to help where its needed, better metals beings used in certain areas (titanium or forged stuff versus the good old aluminum), shorter gear boxes, better drivetrain, tire technology, lighter wheels, overall ability to maximize each and every pony in the engine, not to mention oil in the engine is much better formulated today, hoses and other small parts are more sealed and of better quality, power steering anyone? lol. you name it baby.... it all got better.

All the above can be summarized in one word.... TECHNOLOGY!! and continual R&D.

[The_Blur]

Weight—it was measured differently back then. I can't remember what the old measurement was, but the new one is based upon a full tank, a load of average-weighing passengers, and bonus weight in the trunk to compensate for baggage.

Horsepower—this too is measured slightly differently. I can't remember how, but even today the standards are only estimates. Take your car to 2 different dynos and you'll get 2 different numbers. Also, remember that elevation may yield different results. I don't know the modern elevation for dyno runs that car companies use as a standard, but I think it's different than back then. I read this somewhere, but now I can't remember where.

Efficiency—not all the power got to the wheels back then. Even today, a significant amount of power is lost in translation. With new technology, more of the power gets to the floor.

Tires—stock tires are just better than they used to be. With decades of additional research, it's downright unfair to compare a '67 Camaro with a '02 model with stock rims and tires because new ones are comprised of new technology that make them handle the power better.

Aerodynamics—while this only makes a big impact at really high speeds, it still impacts quarter mile runs and other types of racing. On the dyno, this doesn't explain anything, but it is clear that newer cars tend to be built with the wind tunnel in mind. Isn't that why they've been redesigning the Volt?

Tuning—computers on cars have vastly changed the way our engines run. With better tuning ratios and numbers, we get better results. Using the same engine, we can clearly show that the tune makes a difference. All of you with modified cars know that chips and reprogramming tools, when properly used, are great ways to gain horsepower that was already built into your ride.

[smokn']

^thanx guys, u really answered my question

[CamaroSpike23]

one other thing,

i see blur hit on it a bit. is the motors themselves. yeah, they made 400 hp but they didnt do it very efficiently. 10 miles to the gallon sucks. mixed in with the weight, is how the weight it placed in the car. with the cars coming off the line lower from the factory than the days of old leaf springs. with upgraded suspension comes better times.

what ive always laughed at is the fact that back in the day they offered these super engines straight from the factory for relatively cheap. 300hp was the starting point. not 170, or 250. with the exception of the vette, and a few SS camaros, how many other cars came out with over 300hp? (not including the new G8 and whatnot, im talkin the last decade or two)

hell with the emissions cutting down in the 70's, the Z28 of 76 was rated at like 175hp.