![]() 12/14/2013 at 21:55 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
I was looking at 442's and this came up.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 22:01 |
|
So...does it have a 442 cu.in. (7.2L) engine? If so, it will have literally...many torques!
![]() 12/14/2013 at 22:02 |
|
That's not what 442 means.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 22:10 |
|
If only...
Those Mustang wheels are bothering me though.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:36 |
|
NO! 442 does not mean 442ci. 4-4-2 meant different things different years. In 64 it was originally 4 barrel, 4 speed, dual exhaust. Then folks wanted the option of an automatic, so in 65 it was 400ci, 4 barrel, dual exhaust. Then at some point the 455 came along and I lose track. In 72 it didn't mean much of anything other than trim level, but you could still opt for the performance stuff. At some point in the 90s there was a 442. I forget what they meant. 4 valve, 4 cylinder, dual exhaust? I dunno, nobody cares much about that one.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:38 |
|
They're sorta in spirit with these:
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:38 |
|
Is it me, or is that just a mustang with a weird face. And there's no way it could possibly be a 442. No 4-barrel carbs and probably not a 4-speed. Plus, Olds was a GM company. WTF?
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:39 |
|
Do you have any other angles of this thing? As an Oldsmobile lover, I would love to see them come back. But I doubt it will ever happen.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:41 |
|
looks more like a Lincoln Mustang lol.
![]() 12/14/2013 at 23:42 |
|
Sorry, I literally GIS Olds 442 and this was just a random pic.
![]() 12/15/2013 at 07:57 |
|
Ehhhh, that's a stretch. The Camaro's steelies would be a better fit then.
All I see is Track Pack Stang. I probably wouldn't have noticed they used it as a base otherwise.