30 replies to this topic

[Mike Lawrence]

A thought arose from posting on the Pearce-Martin thread.

In the 1960s, some makers of European specialist cars (Bristol, Jensen, Iso, Monteverdi, etc) hit on a formula: American engine, European chassis and body. At best it was American engine, English chassis and Italian body, you would not want an English engine in an Italian chassis with an American body.

Some English marques (Brough Superior, Allard, Railton et al) had been down the route with American engines. American car makers were unsurpassed at casting iron and their large, lazy, engines were superb. I once drove a Brough Superior and the owner's ambition was to hit the half million miles during the 50th anniversary of the marque, though he conceded that the Hudson engine had received a rebuild at 375,000 miles.

What puzzles me is how makers of European specialist cars chose their engines and what were the deals behind them. The Detroit Big Three were prepared to sell their engines and I doubt if there was much in the price. In some cases, like the Gordon-Keeble, size and weight must have been a consideration since it fitted into an existing (Peerless GT) chassis.

Imagine you are a 1960/70s maker of a four-seat GT, how do you chose your V8 engine? Price is not an issue, there was little difference. After-sales service is not an issue either, since American buyers would be looked after and European buyers would be uniformly ignored since none of the V8s was imported on a regular basis. Your little company cannot possibly afford to run back-to-back tests with engines. Size and weight differed, but neither was much of an issue, in those days an engine bay was awash with space and possibility.

Here is the question, asked in pursuit of knowledge. It is 1970 and you are designing a range of cars, from two-seat sports (which will need a manual gearbox) to four-seat semi-GT (automatic transmission, air con, all bells and whistles) which Yankee V8 do you choose and, most importantly, why? Remember, you will never have had the chance to experience the engine in other than Detroit ironware.

[Arthur Anderson]

It seems to me pretty simple, actually. Consider also, that Railton, in the 30's, was using the larger Hudson flathead 6's and 8's.

But why American V8's in post WW-II British and other countries "supercars"? As the late Mickey Thompson put it once (speaking of his various big-block drag cars): There's no substitute for cubic inches."

Bear in mind, that until at least the very late 1970's, there really were not any European engines that could match a 5-liter or larger American V8 for horsepower and torque, particularly at the price. Being mass-produced engines, they were also quite inexpensive to buy, and tended to have tremendous reliability for that price. Sure, they were unsophisticated, especially when compared to a Ferrari, Maserati, Porsche and the like, but if your intention was to have a god-awful fast car, large enough for serious touring, even perhaps room for four inside, then why not? Also, if your small company lacked the capital and/or the facilities with which to engineer and build a highly sophisticated engine, then why not an American V8?

I know that there were a lot of purists out there who turned up their noses, sniffed in horror, at the sight of Ford GT Mk II's and Mk IV's shutting down Ferrari at LeMans back then (My god, with engines built up by none other than Holman & Moody, of Nascar fame!), but again, why not--as long as they fit the requisite formula of the day.

Anyway, those are my opinions, and I think I'll stick with them.

Art

[Arthur Anderson]

Consider that the only generally available crate motors, big blocks, were Ford's 428, Chrysler's 440, and Chevrolet's 396. Of course, Cadillac was approaching 500cid already, and Olds had their monster big block as well, but neither was really considered a performance engine--no options in that direction to speak of, and like Pontiac, they seem to have been loathe to sell engines to other manufacturers at the time, particularly Cadillac, who never really ever did that. Also, the crate motor price at a dealership parts department for the Ford, Chrysler or Chevrolet big block was likely a good bit less than say, a Cadillac.

That said, were I a small, enterprising specialty GT producer in 1970, I think I'd have been somewhat conversant with such cars having American V8's as were available at the time, might even have had the wherewithall to to buy one or two for testing.


I do think my choice would have been the Chrysler 440, simply because that one could eat the other two for breakfast in cars of comparable weight. Couple the 440 with either a Borg Warner 4spd, or Chrysler's excellent Torqueflyte automatic, and you had a very good, solid, reliable package, with plenty of get-up-and-go, and it could be made to run fairly quietly as well, if that were a consideration.

Art

[HDonaldCapps]

I think Art has certainly mentioned one of the first that I would consider and for the same reasons. The Mopar 440 was an excellent engine, probably the best of the big blocks for this sort of use. The engine and the transmissions that Art mentions are also an important part of looking at the overall the package, especially the Torqueflyte automatic transmission which was absolutely top notch, just an excellent piece of work.

The only other option I would have considered is the Chevrolet small block. That would be my first choice in most cases simply because it would be compatible for the various packages I would be pushing out the door -- two and four-seater GTs in various level of tuning. The Chevy small block could be made to perform any function you wanted and was just an excellent engine. The options in the way of transmissions would be wide open, which is not a thing given how the tuning packages could be matched to transmission packages that would handle the performance appropriately.

Tough choice.

I would lean towards the Chevy small block, but I also really think so highly of the 440 that it would almost be a coin toss sort of thing. If I were to wimp out and avoid making a real decision, it would definitely be the 440 in the four-seaters and the Chevy in the two-seaters....

[Gerr]

I think price would have been very much an issue.


IIRC, the British firms, Bristol and Jensen, used Canadian-built engines. Gaining an advantage with duties and taxes. Chrysler Canada would make the most economic sense and they had always made their engines available to marine, RV and other industries.

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Gerr
I think price would have been very much an issue.


IIRC, the British firms, Bristol and Jensen, used Canadian-built engines. Gaining an advantage with duties and taxes. Chrysler Canada would make the most economic sense and they had always made their engines available to marine, RV and other industries.

Ford had an engine plant at Windsor, Ontario at the time of this discussion, so that certainly works--I am not sure about Chrysler, and I don't believe Chevrolet was building any there.

Art

[Catalina Park]

I think that packaging could have played a part.
The Ford 289/302 motor was very compact and would fit into places that a 327/350 Chevy would not fit. If you had the space for a 350 Chev you could almost fit a 440 Chrysler.

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
I think Art has certainly mentioned one of the first that I would consider and for the same reasons. The Mopar 440 was an excellent engine, probably the best of the big blocks for this sort of use. The engine and the transmissions that Art mentions are also an important part of looking at the overall the package, especially the Torqueflyte automatic transmission which was absolutely top notch, just an excellent piece of work.

The only other option I would have considered is the Chevrolet small block. That would be my first choice in most cases simply because it would be compatible for the various packages I would be pushing out the door -- two and four-seater GTs in various level of tuning. The Chevy small block could be made to perform any function you wanted and was just an excellent engine. The options in the way of transmissions would be wide open, which is not a thing given how the tuning packages could be matched to transmission packages that would handle the performance appropriately.

Tough choice.

I would lean towards the Chevy small block, but I also really think so highly of the 440 that it would almost be a coin toss sort of thing. If I were to wimp out and avoid making a real decision, it would definitely be the 440 in the four-seaters and the Chevy in the two-seaters....

Don,

Your argument makes a bit of sense, except that while the Chevrolet small block was certainly iconic in the US in 1970, I'm not sure that held overseas as well. While of course, I have no pricing data from then with which to compare, a new V8 engine from Chrysler, Ford, or Chevrolet (excluding such exotics as the 426 Hemi, or the Boss 429--Ford's Hemi), cost roughly the same delivered in a crate--there just wasn't that much difference in the purchase price between a Ford or Chrysler big block "wedge" and a Chevrolet SB. Also, there wasn't all that much weight "penalty" to be suffered by the Chevrolet 396 as opposed to the 305/350 Chevrolet, the 396 having come along 10 years after the first, 265cid Chevrolet SB, so given the greater torque of the 396, and that it produced that at a bit lower rpm, meant that you could get certainly quieter operation at speed in a luxury touring car.

But, were I going to contract with an American automaker for engines and transmissions for a lineup of grand touring cars, both 2-and 4 place, I believe I'd have been sorely tempted to either use the same engine/transmission combinations for each, or certainly stay within the same brand of engine. For that reason, I'd have been tempted, if I felt the need for a smaller engine for the 2-seater, to have gone with the Dodge/Plymouth 340, for potential cost savings, and still a very, very potent smallblock. The 340 came standard with solid lifters, and a 4bbl carburetor, and could go from pulling tree stumps to screaming rpms.

Standardizing engine brands would also have given standardization of transmission options, with very possible price breaks from the manufacturer when bought in quantity. This would have been very valuable, given that Chrysler's Torqueflyte could be had with manual override directly from the factory, for both up-and downshifting, another important quality in an automatic (I had an absolute blast driving my then-new '70 340 'Cuda w/slapstick Torqueflyte, particularly on the twisty, narrow country roads around Lafayette IN, up and down out of the Wabash River Valley--some of them rival any similar road in Europe, from all the pictures I've seen!). Also, I believe Chrysler had a much better presence in Western Europe in those days, than did Chevrolet, primarily due to their being ready and able to sell cars to US servicemen stationed there, which Chevrolet never really pursued that much, from what I have heard and read.

Art

[HDonaldCapps]

Art,

Using the 340 sounds like the way to go to me -- I simply missed the blinding flash of the obvious and the 340.... :

Using the 340 and the 440 would certainly make great sense if you decided to have a smaller engine in the two-seater. Thay would certainly make sense since there would be a level of some commonality for various components.

And the Big Three all had Canadian operations in or around Windsor, so it would be just matter of whose crates you wanted delivered.

[Mike Lawrence]

Gentlemen, thank you for your insights.

It would never have occurred to me that there might be a fiscal advantage in a British manufacturer using a Chrysler engine made in Canada. To us, a Chrysler was a Yank Tank, even though any reference book would mention the Canadian arm.

Henry and the General had well-established European divisions, but they appeared not to be on speaking terms with each other. In 1970, you could tell the nationality of a country simply by looking at it because it was made for local conditions. These days, a motorway is a freeway, is an autobahn, is an autoroute.

Twenty years ago I was on a BMW car launch in Munich and, during a break, I noted that there were very few Fords on the road, even allowing for the BMW advantage in Bavaria.. I was told that Germans still bought cars by region and that since Fords were made in the North, few in the South would buy one.

To we on one side of the Big Pond, Chrysler always seemed the odd man out. It had no European branch and was not involved in any branch of motor racing with a European connection. We could go all year without seeing a Chevrolet, but Chevy was in Can-Am, and the series was well-covered in the comics.

I know that there was no back-to-back testing in the case of the Monica GT, the Chrysler engines were picked and made to work in the chassis and were also connected to a five-speed ZF gearbox, so the Torqueflyte transmission played no role in that one. I guess that most of the hybrids were created in a similar way.

By the way, the unsold Monica GTs were bought by a great man, not a tall man, who also owned Brabham.

One of the things which prompted my query was that even if a designer was able to get his hands on a range of American cars to test drive, the engines and transmissions were in entirely different environments. When you are talking about a hand-built car, I would guess that the cost of the engine was a very small factor.

[VWV]

Growing up in St.Catharines, Ontario in the 1970's, GM had an engine plant there building Chevy small block V8's.

[petefenelon]

Chrysler power seems to have been the most popular in posh or pseudo-posh "grand tourers" - was it noticeably more refined from an NVH point of view than comparable Chevy or Ford products? Anything that Facel-Vega, Bristol, Jensen and the unspeakably vulgar Monteverdi used clearly had some pretentions towards the carriage trade.

I can't think of any European Mopar "road burners" along the lines of the Cobra, Iso/Bizzarrini, Pantera, etc. Which is odd given how hot some of the hemis etc were on their native territory!

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by petefenelon
Chrysler power seems to have been the most popular in posh or pseudo-posh "grand tourers" - was it noticeably more refined from an NVH point of view than comparable Chevy or Ford products? Anything that Facel-Vega, Bristol, Jensen and the unspeakably vulgar Monteverdi used clearly had some pretentions towards the carriage trade.

I can't think of any European Mopar "road burners" along the lines of the Cobra, Iso/Bizzarrini, Pantera, etc. Which is odd given how hot some of the hemis etc were on their native territory!

There would have been problems with the Chrysler Hemi, though: The 1960's 426cid Hemi engine was, of course, race-born and bred, and even though sold for street use starting in 1965, was a rather temperamental beast--requiriing constant attention to valve train adjustments along with ignition tuning to operate anywhere near its peak of performance. Also, due to the very large cylinder heads, the Hemi was a wide engine, and a rather heavy unit as well, particularly in comparison with the 426-440cid "wedge" head engines, which by the middle 1960's were able to take advantage of the then-current "thinwall" foundry casting technology.

As for "refinement", yes the Chrysler big-block V8 (starting at 383cid, also came in 413, 426 and 440ci displacements), could be a very refined, as well as durable, powerplant, having been designed originally as the replacement for the fabled 331-354-392cid 1st generation Hemi engines of 1952-58, and powering just about every Chrysler line of car from Plymouth to Dodge to DeSoto to Chrysler to Imperial. This engine came in a multitude of levels, from a fairly mild unit with 2bbl carburetion for mundane street use in full-sized Plymouths, Dodges and lower level Chryslers, with 4bbl carburetors for top-line Chrysler and Imperial, to performance units built for muscle-car duty in Coronets, Chargers, Roadrunners, Barracuda's and Challengers. With hydraulic valve trains and well-muffled, it was a superb luxury car engine, but when outfitted with mechanical valve lifters, hot camshaft, dual 4-bbl carburetion with only minimal aircleaners, and free-breathing exhaust systems, well....Plymouth called it right: The "Rapid Transit System", while Dodge just referred to the 440 Wedge as part of it's "Scat Pack"--leading the Dodge Revolution. But, the biggest value in the Chrysler 440 was its legendary durability on the road, something it shared also with not only the Torqueflyte automatic (arguably the best automatic transmission of the day), and the various manual gearboxes available across the automotive world made for great powertrains as well.

Art

[Gerr]

Mike, Chrysler did have European connections, even in the '50s.

As an example, they had a 25% stake in Simca. Facel-Vega had been coach-builder for Simca. The result was the Hemi-powered HK500.

From 1952,Ghia did a ton of work for Chrysler, show cars and limos. The result there was the Dual-Ghia.
................

Don and Art mentioned 426 Hemis and the 340 "LA" engine, both great engines. However, these were not made in Canada, and would have been much more expensive (landed) than the Canadian "Polydome" and "B/RB" V8s, Brisol and Jensen used.
.................

VWV mentioned the Chevrolet plant at St. Catherines. They supplied engines/trans to Studebaker in Hamilton, Ontario, circa 1964-66. This was likely Gordon-Keeble's source as well.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by petefenelon
Chrysler power seems to have been the most popular in posh or pseudo-posh "grand tourers" - was it noticeably more refined from an NVH point of view than comparable Chevy or Ford products? Anything that Facel-Vega, Bristol, Jensen and the unspeakably vulgar Monteverdi used clearly had some pretentions towards the carriage trade.

I can't think of any European Mopar "road burners" along the lines of the Cobra, Iso/Bizzarrini, Pantera, etc. Which is odd given how hot some of the hemis etc were on their native territory!

That GTs using the Mopar V-8 were "posh" tourers, not road burners, was due to the fact that the Ford and Chevy small blocks had factory high performance parts developed by race engine builders availble across the shelf that were not even thought of by Mopar people, until Plymouth and Dodge finally went Trans-Am racing in 1970, even with that, they were well behind, in the ball game.

As far as refined, the Ford and Chevy small, and big block, were thorough breds, compared to anything from Chrysler, unless grocery getter performace, or drag racing,(Where Chrysler put most of its marbles) is considered refinement.
Choices were probalby made either from a financial, or interior connections, stand point, or by performance, size and weight.
The small and big block Fords were smaller and lighter than those from Chevy, and both small blocks, were smaller than the small block Mopar engine.
The Dodge Hemi,(as opposed to the earlier 392, different design) was very heavy 800 some pounds, and outside of drag racing, little to no effort was made to broaden its utility. Once by John Mecom, and once by Roy Woods, both in Group 7 cars.
Bob

[Mac Lark]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe



The small and big block Fords were smaller and lighter than those from Chevy, and both small blocks, were smaller than the small block Mopar engine.

Bob

This is interesting - the general view as to why Ford 302s never cut it in F5000 was because they were heavier than the Chev.

As a matter of interest, Graham McRae reckons there wasn't much wrong with the Ford for 5000 racing.

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe


That GTs using the Mopar V-8 were "posh" tourers, not road burners, was due to the fact that the Ford and Chevy small blocks had factory high performance parts developed by race engine builders availble across the shelf that were not even thought of by Mopar people, until Plymouth and Dodge finally went Trans-Am racing in 1970, even with that, they were well behind, in the ball game.

As far as refined, the Ford and Chevy small, and big block, were thorough breds, compared to anything from Chrysler, unless grocery getter performace, or drag racing,(Where Chrysler put most of its marbles) is considered refinement.
Choices were probalby made either from a financial, or interior connections, stand point, or by performance, size and weight.
The small and big block Fords were smaller and lighter than those from Chevy, and both small blocks, were smaller than the small block Mopar engine.
The Dodge Hemi,(as opposed to the earlier 392, different design) was very heavy 800 some pounds, and outside of drag racing, little to no effort was made to broaden its utility. Once by John Mecom, and once by Roy Woods, both in Group 7 cars.
Bob

Bob,

Actually, the failure of the Transam Mopar's wasn't in the engine compartment, nor the suspension, nor the teams involved. Dan Gurney was quoted in at least one book on the subject as stating that Chrysler's support for their Barracuda's was at best, lukewarm--as compared to what Ford and Chevrolet were doing for the teams using their cars. Also, by being based on full-sized car suspension components, in particular the rear axles, 70 Cuda's and Challengers were both longer and wider, AND a few hundred pounds heavier than either Camaro or Mustang that year, which also translated into a bit of a disadvantage.

As for relative sizes, if one looks at a BB Chrysler block, compared to the others, it is almost exactly the same size, and even when assembled, they don't require significantly more space under the hood than does the BB Chevy or Ford. No more than a couple of inches.

As for performance parts, High performance Chevrolet big block components were aimed more at drag racing than anything else (from the factory), because straight line was pretty much where it was in 1970, for people buying Camaro's, Nova's, Monte Carlos, and Chevelles--the premiere buyer was about 20-25 years old, and the expected tread life on the street of the rear tires was measured in weeks or months, rather than miles. The same was true of Ford at the time--Ford was out of any significant racing involvement other than drag racing and Nascar--Trans-Am was a sidelight for them by 1970--their last year of involvement.

The serious road racing development of Chevrolet engines was in Can Am, and mostly from outside race engine shops, IIRC.

I still go with Chryslers for a hybrid, American V8 powered touring car in 1970.

Art

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by Mac Lark


This is interesting - the general view as to why Ford 302s never cut it in F5000 was because they were heavier than the Chev.

As a matter of interest, Graham McRae reckons there wasn't much wrong with the Ford for 5000 racing.

The Ford was lighter than the Chevy.(due to its shorter deck height, which worked against it in early group 7 racing, as it could not be taken out as far as the Chevy.)

The Ford, had it been developed, was superior to the Chevy as far as horsepower.
It did not make a major effort in Formula 5000, because Ford pulled out of racing; inspite of this, it still managed two wins, in a half-hearted attempt, on carburetors.

Dodge finally got one at Road America, the last year the Formula cars ran.

Penske with the AMC managed several second and third place finishes with an engine that was fifty pounds heavier, than the Chevy, or to put it as Richard Petty said, " if you want horse power,you drive a Ford, Dodge or even AMC; if you want parts, you drive a Chevy."
Bob

[Mac Lark]

Interesting stuff Bob

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by Arthur Anderson


Bob,

Actually, the failure of the Transam Mopar's wasn't in the engine compartment, nor the suspension, nor the teams involved. Dan Gurney was quoted in at least one book on the subject as stating that Chrysler's support for their Barracuda's was at best, lukewarm--as compared to what Ford and Chevrolet were doing for the teams using their cars. Also, by being based on full-sized car suspension components, in particular the rear axles, 70 Cuda's and Challengers were both longer and wider, AND a few hundred pounds heavier than either Camaro or Mustang that year, which also translated into a bit of a disadvantage.

As for relative sizes, if one looks at a BB Chrysler block, compared to the others, it is almost exactly the same size, and even when assembled, they don't require significantly more space under the hood than does the BB Chevy or Ford. No more than a couple of inches.

As for performance parts, High performance Chevrolet big block components were aimed more at drag racing than anything else (from the factory), because straight line was pretty much where it was in 1970, for people buying Camaro's, Nova's, Monte Carlos, and Chevelles--the premiere buyer was about 20-25 years old, and the expected tread life on the street of the rear tires was measured in weeks or months, rather than miles. The same was true of Ford at the time--Ford was out of any significant racing involvement other than drag racing and Nascar--Trans-Am was a sidelight for them by 1970--their last year of involvement.

The serious road racing development of Chevrolet engines was in Can Am, and mostly from outside race engine shops, IIRC.

I still go with Chryslers for a hybrid, American V8 powered touring car in 1970.

Art

Keith Black, who did most of the engine building, was playing catch-up, though in horse power they were not at a disadvantage,(Chevrolets lack in horse power finally became obvious from 1970 on).
Ford and Chevrolet had been working on road racing projects for years, and the Mopar boys, were coming in cold.
Chevy, Ford and even AMC had, at least, two years experience to learn from, and Mopar had rejected Bob Tullius, even after he won the '67 Datona race.
Differential, tranny and engine failure(remember they were running wet-sump engines) are to be expected while playing catch-up.(The weight of the cars, were determined by who could cheat away the most weight without being caught. 3,200 lbs. being legal minimum.)

One could get huge amounts of road racing components directly out of Ford and Chevrolet parts books easily, until 1971, then Ford pulled out of racing.(I found out, when I tried to get some parts for a Boss 302 I drove, in the late seventies, just how far Ford had actually pulled out, it was order and wait, and wait, and wait...)

I take it you were not around in the late sixties upto 1970 when Trans-Am was THE factory racing series, over shadowing even the interesting but non-competitive Can-Am.

Chrysler had never had the parts available that the other three had. In my youtful prime during the Trans-Am years, I could practically recite the parts numbers for road racing part available from catalogs.
If you have ever worked under the hood of a car, trying to make something "new" fit, fractions of a inch are important. Inches are the equivalent of miles.

The early developement of the BB Chevy was through Duntov and the Corvette; McLaren and Chapparal in the Can-Am, both working WITH Chevrolet.
Drag racing benefitted from the batch of ZL-1 Copo Camaros, that made the alloy engine available for both road racing, and drag racing; in that car.

Drag racing was a side line for both Ford and Chevy in 1970; later, when the small block engines became competitive, in the mid-seventies, was the ony time all four manufacturers ever really battled in drag racing.
Ford had pulled support from the SOHC engine, and never put any effort into the Boss Hemi, and the few AA/F drivers using a Chevy, by then, knew it was a lost cause.
Pro Stock, had only started in 1969.

For quick grocery getting speed, any US engine would have worked fine in 1970, but if one even considered going more quickly and faster than normal, any car with a Ford, or Chevy would have always been waiting for the Mopar car to catch-up at the next stop light.
Now if you were building a pro-street car back then....
Bob

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe


Keith Black, who did most of the engine building, was playing catch-up, though in horse power they were not at a disadvantage,(Chevrolets lack in horse power finally became obvious from 1970 on).
Ford and Chevrolet had been working on road racing projects for years, and the Mopar boys, were coming in cold.
Chevy, Ford and even AMC had, at least, two years experience to learn from, and Mopar had rejected Bob Tullius, even after he won the '67 Datona race.
Differential, tranny and engine failure(remember they were running wet-sump engines) are to be expected while playing catch-up.(The weight of the cars, were determined by who could cheat away the most weight without being caught. 3,200 lbs. being legal minimum.)

One could get huge amounts of road racing components directly out of Ford and Chevrolet parts books easily, until 1971, then Ford pulled out of racing.(I found out, when I tried to get some parts for a Boss 302 I drove, in the late seventies, just how far Ford had actually pulled out, it was order and wait, and wait, and wait...)

I take it you were not around in the late sixties upto 1970 when Trans-Am was THE factory racing series, over shadowing even the interesting but non-competitive Can-Am.

Chrysler had never had the parts available that the other three had. In my youtful prime during the Trans-Am years, I could practically recite the parts numbers for road racing part available from catalogs.
If you have ever worked under the hood of a car, trying to make something "new" fit, fractions of a inch are important. Inches are the equivalent of miles.

The early developement of the BB Chevy was through Duntov and the Corvette; McLaren and Chapparal in the Can-Am, both working WITH Chevrolet.
Drag racing benefitted from the batch of ZL-1 Copo Camaros, that made the alloy engine available for both road racing, and drag racing; in that car.

Drag racing was a side line for both Ford and Chevy in 1970; later, when the small block engines became competitive, in the mid-seventies, was the ony time all four manufacturers ever really battled in drag racing.
Ford had pulled support from the SOHC engine, and never put any effort into the Boss Hemi, and the few AA/F drivers using a Chevy, by then, knew it was a lost cause.
Pro Stock, had only started in 1969.

For quick grocery getting speed, any US engine would have worked fine in 1970, but if one even considered going more quickly and faster than normal, any car with a Ford, or Chevy would have always been waiting for the Mopar car to catch-up at the next stop light.
Now if you were building a pro-street car back then....
Bob

Bob,

I most certainly was around in the Trans-Am years, and did watch that series, at least by magazine articles (not very good access to such TV coverage as existed back then, though). But there are other things you've not mentioned:

The Chevy 396, as a follow-on to the earlier W-motor 348/409, was developed as much for the Nascar wars in the mid-60's as anything else. And, in that, Chevy had no less an engine builder than the proprietor of "The best damned garage in town", namely Smokey Yunick. While it's true that Duntov was instrumental in the street development for the Corvette, that didn't result in a super race motor--Duntov was at it for streetable performance in the Vette. The 302cid "cross-fire" Chevy, once put on the street, was more than a bit of a maintenance headache--too many kids bought '69 Z/28's thus equipped, and without very many mechanics who could keep the thing running to its potential. In short, it was . . . more than a bit temperamental, as I recall from the day, which is what discouraged me from buying a new '69 Z with one of those (it was the only one on the dealer's lot when I graduated from college in 1970 (I loathed the looks of the '70 Camaro, and still don't like those very much).

As for the Ford 221/250/289/302, those had quite a reputation back in the day of being a "throwaway engine", the implication being that if anything went wrong with one, you threw it away and bought another one. Now, that is most likely a case of marque rivalries, but nonetheless, it was a very real consideration,particularly were someone offshore seriously considering installing them in even high-performance, limited-production cars. Further, any seriously breathed upon small block Chevy had a rather limited life if pushed very hard at all--given that T/A events were fairly short, just as with sprint car races, it wasn't a problem, but SB Chevies in any form of long distance high speed operation had a terrible tendency to spit out rods with regularity, probably due to the ability of that engine, with good breathing, to rev very quickly beyond the redline. In fact, it wasn't until what, 1980 or so, that a SB Chevy stock block managed to be running at the finish at Indianapolis, probably as tough an assignment as any racing engine ever got in those days.

Given that the years 1964-72 were the years of the muscle-car craze in the US, most development of production car high performance V8's was done for both the stoplight and dragstrip wars, and that includes not only Dodge and Plymouth, but also Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Ford. "Win on Sunday", or "Win at the stoplights on Woodward" translated to sales on Monday., far more than it appears resulted from TransAm successes. For as great a series as TransAm was, it really reached only a minor percentage of those stepping up to by "Pony Cars", rather it was quarter-mile results that mattered to most of the Baby Boomers who were buying the likes of Mustangs, Camaro's, Firebirds, Javelin/AMX's, Barracuda's and Challengers. And in the cars bought by those, larger displacement engines were the most-desired, if not the most built or purchased.


Now, returning to the basic premise at the start of this thread, the question is, what engine would a high-speed touring car, built in Europe, have used? I believe some basic parameters would have existed: More than adequate power output and torque is one. Reliability would also have been a prime consideration--and by that we can read into it, sturdy reliability. 4 hundred horses from a Dodge/Plymouth 440 Wedge, an engine weighing not appreciably that much more than a Ford 428 or a Chevrolet 396/427, certainly gave the durable reliability. My selection of the 340 small block Dodge/Plymouth engine was as much for retaining the same transmission selection as used on the 440 as anything else. My 340 4bbl was as good in that department as any other small block out there, only needing the periodic tuneup and valve train adjustments always associated with solid lifters.

Of course, most of this is academic pondering. I do think, that in point of fact, were such cars designed and produced in 1970, most likely the company producing them would have nodded in Chrysler Corporations direction. Another consideration would have been tractability--and that the big-block Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth did have in spades--even the high-performance versions weren't at all temperamental, nor did they have a distaste for ordinary highway work. And at any rate, the only reason to have considered an American V8 in the first place would have been a matter of cost, and an engine with the low end torque to haul a fairly luxurious touring car around, be it either 2- or 4-place.

Now, if Ford's 351C "Cleveland" had come along say, a year earlier than it did, I think most if all bets would have been off--that was an excellent performance powerplant.

Art

[ray b]

Buick any one? the old 215 was both small and light being an alloy block
and used in land rovers and other strange cars long after GM gave up on it
but the big iron Buicks were a early hot-rod favorit even if the nailheads did not breath to well
the last big block Buicks [1970] were smaller and lighter then the small block chevy
and made good power in stage 1 form

fords 351C was a wide mother that would not fit in a early mustang without alot of work

my dad had a Facel-Vega HK500 with the 58 hemi and a facel II with a 413 wedge

[Gerr]

Buick gave up on the 215 because it was too expensive to manufacture, unless they had volume. They didn't. It was supposed to be a semi-corperate engine, but Oldsmobile wouldn't use it unless it was built to their spec for the F85 (raising the cost) and Pontiac preferred to use their own 4 and V8 for the Tempest to keep the costs down. Olds and Pontiac did not like contributing to Buick's bottom line.

Buick ended up selling the design/rights/tooling for the V6 to Kaiser for a similar reason.

The Buick was not a complete package, either. They didn't build their own transmissions. These would have to purchased from Hydramatic or BW, again raising the cost of the package.
Also Buick didn't build cars or engines in Canada which would mean heavy duties for UK specialists compared to buying within the Commonwealth.

[Bob Riebe]

Art:
Perhaps we see things differently as we were raised in different automotive climates (I went to at least one Trans-Am, some times two, every year from 1969, till the mid-eighties) as here the TA was very, very big time.

The first "mystery" Chevy or Mark II, used different head design than the production or raciing MK.IV.
The Olds developed DRCE, incorported a similar port layout to the original Mk.II heads, and now there are many types of cylinder heads available for Mk. IV, Mk.V, DRCE from aftermarket and Cheverolet itself.(The Sonny Leonard New Generation CHevy heads are of a Hemi[which was changed to semi-hemi] which is similar to both the new Chrysler Hemi, and the currrent style of Boss Hemi, [which can still be had in a full standard shape also].)

The Boss 302 was designed with a red line of 9,000 rpm ( when Ford racers complained it ran poorly below 4,000 rpm, the Ford tech man said: " Then gear it so it does not fall below 4,000)
which caught out every one else.
This was really at the very beginning of major developement of US push-rod engines, in 1970 no Formala engine had even reached 500 hp yet, so the 480 hp the Boss engine was quoted as having in 1969(dual quads), showed just how radically tuned these engines were.

Posey and Donahue, often came in with their telltales, hundreds of rpms past the "do not exceed" limit on the tachs.
Ronnie Kaplan, got screwed when the stud-girdle he developed for the AMC engine (it was still two-bolt mains in 1969) was disallowed, so he had to back off the engines to the level of 1968 which was loss of 100 hp.
The sad thing was, the bonus Penske got for signing up with AMC, exceeded the entire racing budget AMC gave Kaplan for 1968 & 1969 combined.

One point to ponder, if the Mopar engine was the one to choose, how come when ISO stopped using Chevrolet, they then used a Ford?

Ray:
The Buicks were excellant engines, any design.
They were probably the most under rated engines of the era.

The version Rover used WAS used by many cars in GB, and GM tried to buy it back when the so-called engergy crisis hit.
Rover knew a good thing when they saw it.
The Cleveland Ford was fifty pounds heavier, + or -, than the Windsor due to different casting forms of the timing chain area.
There is now, an aftermarket source, casting alloy versions of the Cleveland block.
Bob

[Gerr]

Bob, you sure that GM wanted the 215 back? Buick re-purchased the V6 back from Kaiser-Jeep during the energy crisis era.........

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Gerr
Buick gave up on the 215 because it was too expensive to manufacture, unless they had volume. They didn't. It was supposed to be a semi-corperate engine, but Oldsmobile wouldn't use it unless it was built to their spec for the F85 (raising the cost) and Pontiac preferred to use their own 4 and V8 for the Tempest to keep the costs down. Olds and Pontiac did not like contributing to Buick's bottom line.

Buick ended up selling the design/rights/tooling for the V6 to Kaiser for a similar reason.

The Buick was not a complete package, either. They didn't build their own transmissions. These would have to purchased from Hydramatic or BW, again raising the cost of the package.
Also Buick didn't build cars or engines in Canada which would mean heavy duties for UK specialists compared to buying within the Commonwealth.

Gerr,

A good rundown of the Buick and Olds compact engines. However, my read of the various stories and histories of GM through the early 70's indicates there was little, if any sentiment at GM, either in the various divisions, or at the corporate level, for the development of "corporate engines". In the case of Buick, I believe this extended to transmissions as well, particularly with automatics, Buick having gone their own way with Dynaflow and it't subsequent variants for perhaps 15-16 years (Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Cadillac used Hydramatics, and Chevrolet of course, the long-running Powerglide). GM's Saginaw Division (also the primary producer of steering gear for all GM Divisions) produced virtually all GM 3-speed manual transmissions, while Muncie Gear produced a great many GM 4-speeds. It was still the age (begun with the sorting out, by General Motors Corporate under the late, and great, Alfred P. Sloan in 1931-33) of each division having its own marque identity through styling, chassis, and engines (although all GM divisions purchased their bodies and sheet metal stampings from the Fisher Body Division, who maintained a body plant attached to each GM division's assembly plant in those days, and which bodies were shared by multiple divisions). Buick, of course, discontinued their V6 due to a lack of sales volume (American drivers just weren't ready to accept a 6-cylinder Buick in any form yet), and a few years later, Kaiser-Jeep, searching for a stronger engine primarily for the Jeep CJ-series, that would fit in the then-shorter engine bay designed around the very compact, but old, Willys Overland 4-cylinder (the genesis of which dated back to the 1927 Whippet!) purchased the rights, designs and tooling for the Buick V6 (Interestingly, Kaiser's successor with Jeep, American Motors, sold the very same V6 designs, tooling AND rights BACK to Buick in 1974-75, at a substantial profit, and it reappeared as the "New Buick V6"!)

The Oldsmobile aluminum V8 designed for the first-generation F-85's, while a pretty good engine by all accounts, was expensive to produce--there having been constant machining problems in production, due to the then-extant aluminum alloying and casting technology making it often problematic as to a consistency of hardness of the aluminum. Pontiac's Tempest 4-cylinder was simply one bank (side) of their 389cid V8, actually being produced on the same machine tools and the same assembly line. Again, while a sturdy engine, the American auto-buying public was less than enamored with an inline 4-cylinder engine, given the innate vibrations and subsequent noise that can come with any fairly large bore 4-cylinder--it just wasn't acceptable in what was pitched as an upscale compact (and I seem to recall that the fuel mileage wasn't particularly exciting either).

With the redesign and re-focusing of Tempest, F-85 and Skylark for the 1964 model year into the then popular mid-size car market, all three cars became much more conventional, and of course, far more successful in the marketplace.

Art

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe
Art:
Perhaps we see things differently as we were raised in different automotive climates (I went to at least one Trans-Am, some times two, every year from 1969, till the mid-eighties) as here the TA was very, very big time.
Bob

Bob,
Not to beat this particular subject to death, but I believe that no matter what region of the US you were in at the time, Trans-Am wasn't the big event (wish it had been so, I was fascinated by such coverage as I could find), unfortunately. Other than AMC, Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, Pontiac and Plymouth equipping (and trimming) their respective pony cars to reflect their Trans-Am efforts, TA, in the end, had fairly little result in sales of new cars. Printed coverage of TA was fairly limited as well, there being far more titles, with much larger aggregate circulation, covering hot rodding and drag racing in the 60's and early 70's compared to those covering any form of road-circuit racing (the same was also true of oval track racing, be it stock cars or open wheel).

Were Trans-Am as major on the racing landscape as either you or I would have liked back then, it seems to me that automakers would have been much more disciplined in their marketing of those cars to the motoring public, simply because there would have been more buyers clamoring for cars truly reflecting their favorites on that circuit--but what we saw primarily were Z/28 Camaro's with 350's and even 396's (remember, Z/28 is the option number of the suspension package, not the drivetrain), Boss Mustangs having 302's only, and Firebird TransAm's that more truly reflected the series. Of course, there were short runs of 'Cuda AAR's and Challenger T/A's, but those found far less acceptance then than they do today. In short, most of the spinoff sales that were generated came primarily from "label-slapping", in the finest of Madison Avenue tradition. I would hazard to say that the vast majority of Firebird TransAm buyers from 1969 to the end of that line never reallly knew the heritage of the name, and probably didn't care much either. The same with Camaro's having the Z/28 package and badge--I rather doubt that very many Camaro buyers either knew or cared over the intervening years.

It is wonderful to think that automakers universally get into racing for the lofty and noble purpose of "Improving the breed" in the mode of say, Ferrari or Porsche; some do, most do not. With mass-production automakers, particularly in the US then (and to a great extent now), it's merely a matter of "win on Sunday, sell on Monday", with really little regard on the part of manufacturers, dealers, and much of the buying public that a particular car is there in the showroom because of its successful racing career.

But, in the 60's, the era of the muscle car, "performance" car buyers bought cars they could readily relate to, and for the vast bulk of under-25 car buyers, the cars they could relate to, and wanted most as a group, were those ready for straight-line acdeleration, there being far more straight streets with stoplights than road or oval race courses, not to mention that the era was perhaps the high-water mark in terms of owner-built and driven drag racing cars. Call them ignorant, call them the "Great Unwashed", whatever--their's was a pretty large population, and they really enjoyed the idea of smoking off small-block cars.

Art

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by Arthur Anderson


Bob,
Not to beat this particular subject to death, but I believe that no matter what region of the US you were in at the time, Trans-Am wasn't the big event (wish it had been so, I was fascinated by such coverage as I could find), unfortunately. Other than AMC, Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, Pontiac and Plymouth equipping (and trimming) their respective pony cars to reflect their Trans-Am efforts, TA, in the end, had fairly little result in sales of new cars. Printed coverage of TA was fairly limited as well, there being far more titles, with much larger aggregate circulation, covering hot rodding and drag racing in the 60's and early 70's compared to those covering any form of road-circuit racing (the same was also true of oval track racing, be it stock cars or open wheel).

Were Trans-Am as major on the racing landscape as either you or I would have liked back then, it seems to me that automakers would have been much more disciplined in their marketing of those cars to the motoring public, simply because there would have been more buyers clamoring for cars truly reflecting their favorites on that circuit--but what we saw primarily were Z/28 Camaro's with 350's and even 396's (remember, Z/28 is the option number of the suspension package, not the drivetrain), Boss Mustangs having 302's only, and Firebird TransAm's that more truly reflected the series. Of course, there were short runs of 'Cuda AAR's and Challenger T/A's, but those found far less acceptance then than they do today. In short, most of the spinoff sales that were generated came primarily from "label-slapping", in the finest of Madison Avenue tradition. I would hazard to say that the vast majority of Firebird TransAm buyers from 1969 to the end of that line never reallly knew the heritage of the name, and probably didn't care much either. The same with Camaro's having the Z/28 package and badge--I rather doubt that very many Camaro buyers either knew or cared over the intervening years.

It is wonderful to think that automakers universally get into racing for the lofty and noble purpose of "Improving the breed" in the mode of say, Ferrari or Porsche; some do, most do not. With mass-production automakers, particularly in the US then (and to a great extent now), it's merely a matter of "win on Sunday, sell on Monday", with really little regard on the part of manufacturers, dealers, and much of the buying public that a particular car is there in the showroom because of its successful racing career.

But, in the 60's, the era of the muscle car, "performance" car buyers bought cars they could readily relate to, and for the vast bulk of under-25 car buyers, the cars they could relate to, and wanted most as a group, were those ready for straight-line acdeleration, there being far more straight streets with stoplights than road or oval race courses, not to mention that the era was perhaps the high-water mark in terms of owner-built and driven drag racing cars. Call them ignorant, call them the "Great Unwashed", whatever--their's was a pretty large population, and they really enjoyed the idea of smoking off small-block cars.

Art

Art:
The fact that Chrysler even made the effort to build the AAR and TA, showed how important the Trans-Am was.
The Z28, never came with a 396, the SS did, but you could get a Z28, with the RS option which included no engine change.
The Z28, at least as long as the original form Trans-Am lived, was always a specific engine-chassis set-up.(RS was styling cues)

In any line, the majority of cars sold were actually grocery getter cars, which included six cylinder Camaros and Mustangs, etc.
There were never any NASCAR homologation special from Chevrolet, ala winged Mopars, and slope nosed Fords, but every single auto maker made cars and parts available just for the Trans-Am series. (It was efforts and nagging by Ford die hards, Tom Gloy for one, who finally got Ford back into road racing , by fielding a winning TA car in the very early eighties, when Ford offered zero support)

In the area I am in, drag racing was considered on the same level as sprint car racing, interesting, at a a regional level.
NASCAR up here was just another regional stock car series which had a track in Florida that held a very important road race., and the only NASCAR track,other than Talladega, that was of special interest.(USAC stockers were just as important, and with Texas and Michigan also had their super tracks, plus ASA was BIG back then with Ford, Chevy and AMC each supporting a special top driver for a publicized rivalry. Trickle drove the Ford, and Reffner the AMC but I forget the other.)

At least in my area, you sell the intelligence of gear-head youts short.
Pony cars sold very well, including AMC, and as a rather odd note, full size Chevrolet SS and Ford Galaxie performance modes were as common as Chevelle, Fairlane etc. performance models into the seventies.(THe best known area drag racer, pre pro-stock, drove a 427 Galaxy station wagon)
There were a fair number of Road Runner and Super Bees, due to low price( most only had 383s)
but Challenger and Barracudas still out numbered them.(I still want to puke every time I see a Purple Challenger, with a white vinly top)

I remember vividly, the 1970 TA at Donnybrooke, when so many fans showed up that (Minnesota was not run by fascist wannabes then) people were staking tents in every inch of way side rest stops and actually even just plain in the ditch on the side of the road.
It was not just the shanty town appearence, but the hundreds of pony cars, and muscle cars, from every maker, including many of the specials from out of state Yenko, Grand Spaulding etc.

It was the only arena ever, where all four companies had factory and factory supported teams, and cars made just for it.
Just another series, not likely.
Bob

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by Gerr
Bob, you sure that GM wanted the 215 back? Buick re-purchased the V6 back from Kaiser-Jeep during the energy crisis era.........

It was reported in several journals, but it was probably Comp. Press & Autoweek I read it in, that GM wanted to buy the alloy engine and all involved back from Rover.
Rover offered to sell them engines, but fully intended to keep the equip.

GM apparently could not stand the thought of buying engines of their own design, from another auto company, and refused.
Bob

[Arthur Anderson]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe

Art:
The fact that Chrysler even made the effort to build the AAR and TA, showed how important the Trans-Am was.
The Z28, never came with a 396, the SS did, but you could get a Z28, with the RS option which included no engine change.
The Z28, at least as long as the original form Trans-Am lived, was always a specific engine-chassis set-up.(RS was styling cues)

In any line, the majority of cars sold were actually grocery getter cars, which included six cylinder Camaros and Mustangs, etc.
There were never any NASCAR homologation special from Chevrolet, ala winged Mopars, and slope nosed Fords, but every single auto maker made cars and parts available just for the Trans-Am series. (It was efforts and nagging by Ford die hards, Tom Gloy for one, who finally got Ford back into road racing , by fielding a winning TA car in the very early eighties, when Ford offered zero support)

In the area I am in, drag racing was considered on the same level as sprint car racing, interesting, at a a regional level.
NASCAR up here was just another regional stock car series which had a track in Florida that held a very important road race., and the only NASCAR track,other than Talladega, that was of special interest.(USAC stockers were just as important, and with Texas and Michigan also had their super tracks, plus ASA was BIG back then with Ford, Chevy and AMC each supporting a special top driver for a publicized rivalry. Trickle drove the Ford, and Reffner the AMC but I forget the other.)

At least in my area, you sell the intelligence of gear-head youts short.
Pony cars sold very well, including AMC, and as a rather odd note, full size Chevrolet SS and Ford Galaxie performance modes were as common as Chevelle, Fairlane etc. performance models into the seventies.(THe best known area drag racer, pre pro-stock, drove a 427 Galaxy station wagon)
There were a fair number of Road Runner and Super Bees, due to low price( most only had 383s)
but Challenger and Barracudas still out numbered them.(I still want to puke every time I see a Purple Challenger, with a white vinly top)

I remember vividly, the 1970 TA at Donnybrooke, when so many fans showed up that (Minnesota was not run by fascist wannabes then) people were staking tents in every inch of way side rest stops and actually even just plain in the ditch on the side of the road.
It was not just the shanty town appearence, but the hundreds of pony cars, and muscle cars, from every maker, including many of the specials from out of state Yenko, Grand Spaulding etc.

It was the only arena ever, where all four companies had factory and factory supported teams, and cars made just for it.
Just another series, not likely.
Bob

Bob,

Z/28 still referred to the suspension package, RPO Z28, that's what earned the Z/28 badges on the front fender. As such, Z's were produced with up to 350's, as you allude to, but also could be had with automatic transmission, AND RS trim. Chrysler Corp. was pushed into competing in Trans-Am, as much by all their competition being there as for finally having gotten a pony car line out of the starting blocks. However, by 1970, the bloom was already off the pony car (Mustangs, Camaro's, Firebirds, et. al. which decline has been attributed to the rise of the compact and intermediate size performance cars, by more than one writer.

Nascar and USAC's stock car division both were very regional circuits, even though Nascar had run Riverside CA for at least 8-9 years by 1970, otherwise being very localised to the southeastern US. USAC's stock cars raced almost exclusively in the midwest, primarily on mile dirt tracks, with the occasional road circuit thrown in, but also quite regional. However, if one goes back to those days, looks at all the advertising, stock car wins were highly publicised nationwide, pretty much across the full range of magazines. By the middle 1960's, even though they probably never attended a Grand National Race, I would submit that most people across the US knew of Nascar, and many saw the much-interrupted major Nascar races on TV (remember the days when race coverage got interrupted to bring us such exciting things as figure skating, and Jean-Claude Killey (the French skier) actually pulling "color man" duties on CBS Sports Spectacular racing coverage?)

One needs to go back to the 50's to see extensive factory support in Nascar--Ford, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Pontiac all had factory support and/or teams, as did Hudson in the early 50's--and lots of specialty parts went out the side doors when automakers either did not participate directly, or backed out, such as under the AMA prohibition of factory support (which Chevy and Pontiac conveniently forgot to honor).

Truly high-performance full-sized cars pretty much had faded from the scene by 1969--oh yes, you could still order a balls-to-the-walls Impala (BTW, SS was a Chevy trim level, not necessarily related to high performance), possibly a few Galaxies, Pontiac Bonnevilles, but by and large those larger cars went back to being their companie's luxo cruisers.

And, even more telling I think, was the rise of the fully trimmed out pony car, with air conditioning, automatic transmission, 8-track, power windows, even some dedicated body shells--Mustang Grande, Barracuda Gran Coupes, Challenger LE's, Camaro SS and the like. In the end, I suspect that it was simply that Trans-Am participation by Ford, GM and Chrysler just didn't translate into increased sales on Monday, which led all three to abandon their direct involvement in the series.

Perhaps there wasn't quite the publicity push made that could have been: When I went shopping for my first new car in the spring of '70, shortly before getting my degree, I saw little, if any, promotional literature in Ford, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Plymouth or Dodge dealers, hyping their companies' road racing program--and I did this, not in some vacuum, but in the shadow of a major Big Ten university, well-known for its engineering schools--whose students were as in tune with roadracing as anyone on the planet.

All that said, even though I still maintain that Trans-Am was relatively unknown across the US, to most people, it was still an interesting series up through at least 1970, and one in which virtually every race was a knock-down, drag out battle on the race course, extremely competitive, but that seems to me to have been the breadth and depth of the matter.

Art

[Bob Riebe]

Bob,

Z/28 still referred to the suspension package, RPO Z28, that's what earned the Z/28 badges on the front fender. As such, Z's were produced with up to 350's, as you allude to, but also could be had with automatic transmission, AND RS trim. Chrysler Corp. was pushed into competing in Trans-Am, as much by all their competition being there as for finally having gotten a pony car line out of the starting blocks. However, by 1970, the bloom was already off the pony car (Mustangs, Camaro's, Firebirds, et. al. which decline has been attributed to the rise of the compact and intermediate size performance cars, by more than one writer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Art:
A Z28 came with, and only with a manual box 302, due to its lack of low speed torque, from 1967-1969, after that yes, you got a 350 and either box.(After '72 it was rather pathetic)
The cheap muscle cars--beep, beep-- may have cut into the not so cheap Boss and Z sales, but I do remember the govt. meddling that started in 1971 (main reason Ford quit racing) was what drove the nail in the coffin.
By 1973, all but for a few hold-outs Pontiac and AMC, the performance car era was dead to be replaced by rust bucket Pintos, and Vegas.

You say potato, I say potato--I guess some things don't work too well in print,--but those were the good years, now if only someone would start a road racing series that did not consist of a bunch of spec. and restrictor contrived equality rules, then put the Mustang against the Holden GTO and BMW....

Bob