There's no way an original GTO did 0-60 in under 5 seconds

"BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather" (bugeyedacura) 01/28/2014 at 14:25 • Filed to: None

2

22

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/1964-p…

I call shenanigans. A new GTO with just as much HP and a modern tranny and tires isn't even that fast.

Storz > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:26

1

I agree, those old numbers are way off.

Harrycarry250 > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:29

1

Um yeah, those numbers are a bit skewed. I also don't believe that engine produced 350 horses...

Textured Soy Protein > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:29

5

From the article itself:

Our test cars were Bobcats. This means that they were basically stock Tempest GTO's with the following changes:

1. The main jets were changed to .069 in on all three carburetors for maximum acceleration. Normally, the center carburetor runs lean (.066 in) for cruising economy, with rich jets (.073 in) on the outboard carburetors for occasional bursts of speed. The Royal treatment gives a more even mixture distribution at a slight increase in steady-speed gas consumption.

2. A progressive-action throttle linkage is installed to calm the beast down for boulevard use; it's also more accurate than the stock linkage.

3. The distributor is modified to limit centrifugal advance to 7° (14 crankshaft degrees) and initial advance is set at a whopping 20–22° (total advance, 34–36°, is reached at 3600 rpm). This makes a tremendous improvement in low-end response (i.e., below 3600 rpm) but substantially raises the octane requirement.

4. The heat riser is blocked off, a special (thin) head gasket from the Super-Duty 421 engine is installed and still more compression is gained by installing Champion J-10Y plugs without gaskets.

5. Finally, special fiber-insert rocker arm retaining locknuts are installed which permit the hydraulic lifters to function as a solid lifter—operating at 90% bleed-down.

As you can see, these changes are neither extensive nor complicated, and fall more into the area of maximum tuning than of modification or "hopping up." The net result is enormously strong engine with the capacity to spin its wheels in every gear, in spite of a limited-slip differential! The only penalty we noticed was that the car would knock like twenty-five poltergeists at a seance when anything but Sunoco 260 premium fuel (about 102 octane) was used .

Gamecat235 > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:31

0

Horsepower ratings have changed a couple of times since then. And underrating the horsepower performance was fairly common at the time.

ETA: and in this case, as well as others, C&D was supplied with a ringer.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/gto-vs…

http://books.google.com/books?id=4Yu2y…

lone_liberal > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:31

1

It's well known that not only was the car in question running a 421 not a 389, and a well "tuned" one at that, but that the whole thing was a sham.

oldirtybootz > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:37

3

It's long been said that the Ponchos were ringers. Ironic, since it's what Ferrari does these days with their test cars.

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > Gamecat235 01/28/2014 at 14:39

0

That would have to be a LOT of extra power to get the car up to that speed with its technological limitations.

Saracen > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:39

1

Carbureted big block V8 engines can put down massive power, especially when you don't care if it gets 5mpg on 102 Octane gas. There were some crazy fast cars back then.

MooseKnuckles > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:40

1

The measure of HP has changed since then and many cars were greatly underrated. Some owners of early to mid 60's Vettes claim 500hp from factory.

Gamecat235 > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:40

1

It would... but this specific one was the infamous GTO vs GTO model wasn't it? I added some stuff in my edit.

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > Textured Soy Protein 01/28/2014 at 14:42

0

The ratings would almost have to be double to give the car the numbers it had. Much more of the "hopping up" they claimed didn't happen than the optimization they claimed it was.

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > Gamecat235 01/28/2014 at 14:43

0

Yeah I think so. They seem to mention the Ferrari in the article several times.

Textured Soy Protein > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:48

2

Well, despite their claim that this was "just tuning, not modifying," those are some pretty extensive modifications. Re-jetting the carbs, new throttle linkage, wayyy more timing advance, higher compression ratio, and sorta-solid lifter conversion will make a lot more power. The fact that the car needed 102 octane just to run right gives you a pretty good indication of how much it had been breathed on over stock.

AutoSavant > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:49

1

Lighter car, lots of torque, pro driver. Keep in a mind a new GTO will keep going without a limiter into the 180 mph+ club, that 64 was all done at 130 or so. The Bobcat GTO tested in that article actually had a 421 instead of the 389, and had a lot of other tricks to make it a "ringer", like cam, compression, CI, rear gears, transmission ratio. It was however fairly easy to get big HP and torque figures from the Pontiac 389 and 421 engines because of the MUCH better gas quality, and the factory go fast parts designed to make those cars into quarter mile screamers. Those engines are big torque, long stroke stump pullers

McMike > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:53

4

Back then they used SAE stopwatches.

Biodegradable Wiring Harness > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 14:58

0

I'm sure it was a ringer, but older cars have soft suspensions and a high center of gravity which is bad for handling and braking, but it helps 0-60 times on a RWD platform in particular because it means more weight transfer to the rear wheels. I don't see why the transmission should hold it back. Are manual shifts faster nowadays? 5.5 seconds or so wouldn't surprise me at all.

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > Biodegradable Wiring Harness 01/28/2014 at 15:01

0

4 Speeds take a lot longer to ring out. And yes the manuals of today are a lot easier to shift.

The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123 > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/28/2014 at 21:49

0

Note that it also topped out at 115... Torque and gearing can work wonders for 0-60 times too.

Storz > McMike 01/29/2014 at 09:26

0

Bingo

crowmolly > BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather 01/30/2014 at 11:02

0

With a 3.90 axle ratio it is in the realm of possibility if it's a prepped track and they wail on it.

crowmolly > Textured Soy Protein 01/30/2014 at 11:13

0

Jetting and timing is certainly not extensive.

Dumping the vacuum cans for progressive linkage, swapping head gaskets, and changing rocker nuts is modifying. Minor, but still modifying. Gasket swap could get you another .25 of compression or so.

crowmolly > Biodegradable Wiring Harness 01/30/2014 at 11:21

0

1.) Ratios were not the same as they are today. If this car was an M21 Muncie, it had a 2.20 first gear vs. 2.66 in the modern GTO's T56

2.) Old school linkage isn't the greatest. Shift throws were long, even with "short throw" shifters.