B-Bodies or Chevelle?

[Removed user as requested]

Hey,

Just wondered something that I cant seem to find on google that is satisfactory for me.

To build a pro-touring 68 charger, or 70 roadrunner, or 70 chevelle... which would overall be able to achieve more?

Which of the 3 would/can be made the lightest, so power-weight ratio for quick runs?

These are the 3 cars i like most and just wondered from a performance perspective, which would be the best 1/4 mile or handling.

My assumption is:

Charger the heaviest even if all alloy parts etc gotten to reduce as much as possible. Its physically the biggest car.

Roadrunner being 2nd heaviest, slightly smaller than charger, 116" wheel base.

Chevelle being capable of being the lightest, sitting at 112" wheelbase making it the smallest of the 3.

[BMR Sales]

I thought you said you bought a Chevelle last week!

[Schwartz Performance]

You said the Chevelle is capable of being the lightest, after you asked which of the three can be made the lightest...?
No doubt the Mopars are the largest and heaviest..

-Dale

[NJSPEEDER]

The only way to compare which can truly be lightest is to weigh the shell itself and decide how many lightweight goodies your wallet can actually support. There is a lot of CF and Ti stuff out there to make any muscle car scale like a Honda Civic if your wallet has the right power to weight ratio :)

-Tim

[Gratefuldiver]

Nothing to do with weight but, I would guess that the Chevelle would be the cheapest to build and you'll find more aftermarket parts for it then you would for a Mopar

[raustinss]

As a Chevelle owner there is WAY more stuff for them,then the mopars. They also have a full frame which the mopars don't. Oh and of course it's a Chevy not a mopar that alone should be enough to want a Chevy

[benno505]

what is the weight of these cars? wheelbase does not determine a lighter car.
my 68 charger weighs 1575kg, and only things it has different from factory is chromoly k member, coilovers, disc brakes, 4 link, alloy heads, fibreglass bonnet. also has a full stereo in it.
mopars are probably double the price to do up the same as a chebbie.

[benno505]

As a Chevelle owner there is WAY more stuff for them,then the mopars. They also have a full frame which the mopars don't. Oh and of course it's a Chevy not a mopar that alone should be enough to want a Chevy



bit of mopar hatin going on. some words of inspiration: HEMI, 6 pack, best gearbox built, made some of the best looking muscle cars, had one of the best factory suspension setups, rarely gets beaten in a straight line, mopar people are more genuine, mopars are rarer so appreciated more.

you started this haha

[Removed user as requested]

Hey,

Thanks for replies. First of, I did not state the chevelle "is" the lightest. I said I assume it is because it is smaller. The shorter wheelbase of the car is a result of car being shorter itself than the mopars B-bodies. So i assumed based on size alone that it can be the lightest of the 3. I wanted to know whether that assumption is sound or there are other aspects to. I mean, if all 3 cars got a full carbon fiber body, doors etc, there is still less carbon used on a smaller chevelle and thus still lighter, this is my logical guessing but may not be right due to something i do not know about. Hence i asked which one can be lightest.

Chevelle being full frame rather than unibody, i heard that makes it heavier, so perhaps in this is where a charger may be able to be made lighter ultimately because it is not a full frame... ???

Yes i bought a chevelle. I was just curious because i did own a 68 charger prior.

I wouldnt say mopar is better/appreciated more due to being rarer. It can be said they are rarer because nobody wanted to buy them. They were too busy buying fords and chevs. But anyway, im not brand loyal. I had a 68 dodge charger, i had a 69 ford mustang after it and now i have a 70 chevy.

Also to go by genuinity, i lost all my money, got ripped off on, lied to etc by mopar people. My experience is, they are the worst of the lot who live in a parallel universe when it comes to value etc. Its mopar must be worth a milion dollars. Idiots.

Terms of better suspension parts etc. Last i checked, 5 speed or 6 speed gearboxes come from tremec for mopar and chev. New suspension etc also comes from the same companies. So really they all use the same stuff mechanically. Which again comes to is the chevelle lightest based on size alone since suspension, brakes etc is all same on all from same aftermarket companies?

Mopars rarely lose in straight line. Power to weight ratio. 500hp in a charger or say a camaro, theres no way the charger would win. This again comes to my other point that my experience is mopar people are the worst. Just because its 'mopar' doesnt mean its fast. That is purely based on power to weight ratio not the name. In this case B-bodies being the worst of the lot, aka mopar. Some how the mentality is mopar or no car though. Shame name means nothing for performance but power-weight ratio, the very point B-bodies failed.

However if you remember my thread earlier about hemi/other, i tried to understand does 'hemi' at 700 HP mean faster than Wedge at 700hp. Conclusion is no. Hemi is a design that achieves power like other designs. In end its the figure and the curve not the name.

I do agree however if we go ultimate power, perhaps a hemi can make more (im talking 5000+ horsepower here).

So back to which is lighter. There all good cars, i had them all.

I am going to build car to certain spec, so whether i build a 70 chevelle at 700 HP or a dodge charger at 700hp or a roadrunner at 700hp... my guess was the chevelle would be the king because its smaller and lighter of the big 3. However maybe the others can be lighter for some reason and the only reason i can think of is unibody not full frame...

So what im trying to gauge ultimately is this:

All 3 (68 charger, 70 roadrunner, 70 chevelle) built to be the lightest possible, using alloy parts everywhere and carbon where existent. Full interior as its a street car. Same power in all 3 etc. Same driver in all 3. Which will handle the best and which will drag race the best.

My assumption is the chevelle. Shorter wheelbase, smaller car therefor lighter and thus to pick of the 3 which to make the chevelle will in the end be the best.

That is a very basic conclusion i come to. As stated, all 3 built correctly so that everything between them is equal, only difference is weight and size. So which one ends up better?

[nekkidhillbilly]

i would go out on a limb and say a torino would be better than any light cheaper than all 3.

[JAWSS]

Another Chevelle vote here but my dream grand touring car is a 69 Charger.

[benno505]

if you wanted to compare a b body with a camaro with the same horsepower than yes maybe the camaro will win, i was merely talking about both factory cars. Look at nascar in the late 60's early 70's mopar was 1, 2 and 3 nealluy all the time, as they were fast and handled well. i am sorry you got stuffed over by mopar people, b body rarer because TV and movies destroyed 3/4 of them. look at the movie Bullitt.
they needed 3 mustangs to 1 charger. the mustang needed engine upgrades, suspension upgrades to keep up with the charger, as it kept breaking or was too slow. and that was in a lighter car with a 390 big block. the charger did not have a single thing changed to it and they couldnt break it.

i am not saying mopars are the best because i own a mopar, im a car guy so i like all cars. but i every 4 out of 5 muscle cars you see are chebbies, which in my opinion does not make them standout or anything spectacular. but each there own. if i were to build a hefty race car i would probably also go with a torino or a camaro

[raustinss]

bit of mopar hatin going on. some words of inspiration: HEMI, 6 pack, best gearbox built, made some of the best looking muscle cars, had one of the best factory suspension setups, rarely gets beaten in a straight line, mopar people are more genuine, mopars are rarer so appreciated more.

you started this haha

Most popular engine, company has never been bought and sold like a used car,known for great drivetrain and until few years ago number one manufacturer for 80 plus years.......

Your turn

[Schwartz Performance]

I love torsion bars and leaf springs.. I mean if they're still using them in today's vehicles, that means they handle great right?

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

[High Plains Mopars]

Hey,
To build a pro-touring 68 charger, or 70 roadrunner, or 70 chevelle... which would overall be able to achieve more?

Which of the 3 would/can be made the lightest, so power-weight ratio for quick runs?

These are the 3 cars i like most and just wondered from a performance perspective, which would be the best 1/4 mile or handling.



Assuming the "more" consists of lightest, 1/4 mile, and handling, it can be all or it can be none. I have seen all three of these body styles in weight ranges from 3200 to 4200#. I've seen them with all with 20o cid six bangers to 600 cid mountain motors. Ive seen them wallow around corners like a drunken sailor and turn 20 second e.t.s while others can carve a corner like a Christmas turkey and slap you with a 9 second e.t.

BTW, you might want to update your title to Charger vs Chevelle. To a chevy guy, a B body is a Caprice and your Chevelle is an A body.


The only way to compare which can truly be lightest is to weigh the shell itself and decide how many lightweight goodies your wallet can actually support. There is a lot of CF and Ti stuff out there to make any muscle car scale like a Honda Civic if your wallet has the right power to weight ratio :)

-Tim

Here in is the crux of it all. Any car can be made uber light and mega powerful if you have the $$ to accomplish it. It just happens that for the vast majority of us, that can be most easily accomplished using a Chevy platform. This is because of the sheer number of these cars out there, the return on investment for someone to make specialized parts for a Chevy far outweighs the same effort for a Ford or Mopar, so there are going to be more selection at more price points for the Chevy.


As a Chevelle owner there is WAY more stuff for them,then the mopars. They also have a full frame which the mopars don't. y

Again, volume plays into the equation which means for most of us, cost is a factor. If it wasn't, we would all be building cars that were like the G-Force Cuda with no expense spared. The full frame deal, well most cars now are unitized and frames are regulated to trucks. Does that make it superior? Depends on the application and intention. Some very fast race cars are monocoque construction with no frame at all. Most saturday night racers are built on frames. I don't see this as a right or wrong situation.


bit of mopar hatin going on. some words of inspiration: HEMI, 6 pack, best gearbox built, made some of the best looking muscle cars, had one of the best factory suspension setups, rarely gets beaten in a straight line, mopar people are more genuine, mopars are rarer so appreciated more.
you started this haha

Lots of opinions there along with some very historically sounds items. You are entitled to them given your set of wheels. Having raced all three of the US Big Three, I can tell you they all have distinct advantages and dis-advantages. Similarly, I've run into plenty of great people as well as a fair share of jerks within all three makes.



Hey,
Also to go by genuinity, i lost all my money, got ripped off on, lied to etc by mopar people. My experience is, they are the worst of the lot who live in a parallel universe when it comes to value etc. Its mopar must be worth a milion dollars. Idiots.

You certainly got taken to the cleaners in some of your earlier dealings, but you also had a very clean and smooth transaction with some great people when you acquired your last Charger. Like I said earlier, I've run into really good and really bad people of all makes. It isn't limited to just Mopars but there seems to be less range in the Mopar camp. The tend to be great, or major jerks. Not much in between. However, I can't disagree much with Mopar owners perception of value. I'll point out more towards that further below.


New suspension etc also comes from the same companies. So really they all use the same stuff mechanically. Which again comes to is the chevelle lightest based on size alone since suspension, brakes etc is all same on all from same aftermarket companies?

Here you are incorrect. The only company that makes suspension parts for all three makes is Hotchkis. Otherwise, almost all of these aftermarket companies concentrate on usually one specific brand. Detroit Speed is starting to get into some Ford parts, but currently, sticking to one car make will limit you suspension choices to a select number of vendors who chose different ways to address the factory shortcoming.



However if you remember my thread earlier about hemi/other, i tried to understand does 'hemi' at 700 HP mean faster than Wedge at 700hp. Conclusion is no. Hemi is a design that achieves power like other designs. In end its the figure and the curve not the name.

I do agree however if we go ultimate power, perhaps a hemi can make more (im talking 5000+ horsepower here).

I missed that thread but something you haven't considered here is the ease of making that power. The opposed valve layout of the Hemi means it makes that power more efficiently than a comparable wedge at any power level, not just at nitro racing levels. Look at what a Kaase Boss 9 can put out. The same can be said about multi-cam motors who also have opposed valves. Ford and Pontiac were all also playing with Hemi motors in the late 60s early 70s, but outside forces all conspired to kill their programs before they gained much name recognition. However, as engineers have learned more about engines in the 40 years since the muscle era, additional means of efficiency have come about which is how new muscle cars are able to make as much stock power as the classics, and do so without the mileage and drive-ability sacrifice.



That is a very basic conclusion i come to. As stated, all 3 built correctly so that everything between them is equal, only difference is weight and size. So which one ends up better?

Better at what? These are all considered mid sized cars. A few inches here, a couple pounds there are not going to make huge differences between them, depending on how they are being utilized. Obviously if they are in an autocross designed for Miatas, they all have a huge dis-advantage. If they are on an open road race like the Silver State, the longer wheelbase is an advantage.


i would go out on a limb and say a torino would be better than any light cheaper than all 3.

You may actually be correct. A friend of mine asked me about helping him sell his Falcon recently. I agreed and began researching pricing thinking his car was an easy $18-20k model. Nope, its worth about $12k tops. Coming from a predominately Mopar background, I was surprised by how inexpensive it can be to get into a Falcon. Torinos are pretty decently priced too. Much better than any Mopar or 1st Gen Camaro or even some of the Chevelles I've seen. However, when you start looking at making significant modifications form stock, aftermarket support can really alter the total cost in involved to build any of them.


Most popular engine, company has never been bought and sold like a used car,known for great drivetrain and until few years ago number one manufacturer for 80 plus years.......

Your turn

I'll give you the most popular engine in the small block. Of course until recently it required you replace most of the factory parts to get it to respectable power levels, but yes, there are 100 million small block chevys out there. That's a lot. I think the simple breadth of all the brands they own would naturally make GM the biggest auto maker for 8 decades. No big secret there. Par it down to any single marque and it changes drastically. Bought and sold, well, if that's a criteria, then bankruptcy also counts and we should all be Ford fans.

How else should we slice this? how about within the classic muscle car era from 1965 to 1974? Nascar Manufacturers championships: Chrysler products-4, Ford products-3, GM products-2. Since we like cars that turn right and left and stop well here, how about Trans Am; Ford products-3, GM products-3, AMC-2, Chrysler-0. NHRA; how would we even begin here. Pro stock didn't really begin until the muscle cars were disappearing. Stock and Super stock may be the ticket, but there was never really a national championship in these catagories in that time frame. Certainly the 409 vs Mopar Super Stocks races are legendary and for all intent, Ford pushed the creation of funny cars with the tube chassis FX/A Comets. But it was the Hemi powered Mopars that dominated SS/A classes for the better part of 40 years.


I love torsion bars and leaf springs.. I mean if they're still using them in today's vehicles, that means they handle great right?


For the last 100 years, there have only been 4 ways to spring a vehicle; leaf, coil, torsion, and air. Have you got some new, yet to be released technology to add to that list? There are some advantages/disadvantages to different methods, but they are all effective to some degree or we wouldn't still be using them. I'd also contend that just because you have the newest, lightest, most sophisticated spring package doesn't necessarily mean you are going to be the fastest one around the track and unless you are competing where you need to constantly adjust rates or pivots, most street drivers really don't need much more than basic set ups, even those of us who fancy ourselves as performance drivers.

[raustinss]

Here here.....
P. S. Ford didn't go into bankruptcy do to the 18 billion it put on the line a few years before hand, Ford put so much on the line it only just recently (1 year or so ) got possession of its own famous ford blue oval. Just to inform anyone who wasn't aware of this . Now let's put the thread hijacking to bed please. My apologies

[Schwartz Performance]

Yikes

[Schwartz Performance]

By the way we make chassis for GM Ford and Mopar, and have done so for the last 5 years. Even did a Gremlin once. ;)

-Dale

[Removed user as requested]

If Hemi is more efficient at producing power... there are Hemi heads available on Chev engines these days making them 'Hemis' as well. *scratches head*

[silvermonte]

There sure is http://nickariasjr.com/bb-chevy-hemi.asp

[High Plains Mopars]

By the way we make chassis for GM Ford and Mopar, and have done so for the last 5 years. Even did a Gremlin once. ;)

-Dale

I stand corrected. Hotchkis and Schwartz make chassis components for all makes. I suppose we could also include Comp Engineering and Alston in that list.

However, except for Hotchkis, most of those components require more than simple bolt on modifications. If you are going for an all out upgrade, that may be fine. If you want to retain your numbers matching muscle car and step up its performance, then a bolt on approach may be more desirable.

Even a Gremlin, now that's thinking outside the box! :-)


If Hemi is more efficient at producing power... there are Hemi heads available on Chev engines these days making them 'Hemis' as well. *scratches head*

Yes, and these have been available since the early 70s. However, the Hemi was already so well established in Chrysler architecture and all the racing after market was built around its design, so the Arias heads never caught on.

Remember, all OEMs were working on Hemis during the muscle era. This is one instance where Chrysler was actually ahead of the curve. While Zora Arkus Duntov (father of the Corvette) made Hemi heads for the flat head Ford all the way back in the '20s, they were not an OEM option and never caught on big. When Chrysler first introduced their first Hemis in the early 50s they were the first of the Big 3 to offer them to the general public and produced them in volume for 5 years. Their high output power made them the preferred choice for drag racing but their heavy and expensive design made them a production nightmare, so they stopped them in production cars. Even the Adrun Ford heads had any number of problems with their design that limited their production from ever catching on in a large scale. By then the Big 3 were deep into OHV engine production, so the flatheads slowly faded away as a performance engine.

By the mid 60s Chrysler decided to resurrect the Hemi as a race only engine. Since the heads are the key to it, the designed a new head and slapped it on an existing block to rush it into production. It was so successful that many sanctioning bodies then demanded it become a production engine available to anyone in an effort to make it available to more drivers, so it began production for passenger cars. Once this happened, Ford and GM were now behind the curve in the horsepower wars. Ford answered the call next with the 427 SOHC Hemi or "Cammer" and the Boss 429 Hemi. To stiffle the SOHC entry into competition, Chrysler began working on a DOHC Hemi. To avoid an escalating horsepower race, Nascar banned the Ford SOHC and Chrysler dropped development on the DOHC. Ford did go into production with the Boss 429 which found its way into many Ford products during that time and the Cammer was used for some time in drag racing. But high production costs and engineering weaknesses prevented them from becoming very prolific.

Pontiac was working on a 427 Hemi design on the GM side during this time. However, the extended development time it took and the politics of the GM heirarchy were such that they didn't have a working prototype until the end of the era was all but sealed. Rising fuel costs, rising insurance costs, more complex racing body rules, and the expense of Hemi production all killed off the GM effort. Similarly, a lower cost Chrysler ball stud Hemi design, actually somewhat similar to the Chevy big block, also died. By this time, the 426 Chrysler design was so entrenched in drag racing, that the efforts of Arias were more of a blip on the radar instead of a horsepower revolution. In this instance, it actually was cheaper and easier to run the Chrysler engine compared to the GM, which required a considerable amount of custom parts only available from one company.

The efficiency of the Hemi design has found its way into may other manufacturers since, predominately none US based, and has evolved into many different SOHC and DOHC, over head cam designs. You will be hard pressed to find a 4 or 6 cylinder engine design that doesn't have opposed valves and at least a semi hemispherical combustion chamber these days. However, Chrysler had trademarked the "Hemi" name some time ago so no one can use it in any mass advertisement of their engines. So even though you can build a hemispherical headed Chevy, in the mind of many enthusiasts , as well as in the legal system, it can't be called a "Hemi" per say.

[1965gp]

I would agree that with enough $$ you should be able to build any of these cars to ultra high standards. Frame or no frame you would probably go aftermarket so that's not a real issue.

Considering the performance and weight of these cars can all be built equally the real variable is size.

I am currently building a. 69 Dodge Charger and next to my 70 GTO it is HUGE! It's a sexy looking car for sure but it is about the same length as my 4 door Ram.

So I think you would need to look at what type of racing / performance you are looking for and what size vehicle fits that better.

[Removed user as requested]

I would agree that with enough $$ you should be able to build any of these cars to ultra high standards. Frame or no frame you would probably go aftermarket so that's not a real issue.

Considering the performance and weight of these cars can all be built equally the real variable is size.

I am currently building a. 69 Dodge Charger and next to my 70 GTO it is HUGE! It's a sexy looking car for sure but it is about the same length as my 4 door Ram.

So I think you would need to look at what type of racing / performance you are looking for and what size vehicle fits that better.

I think if that is basically the case, then the Chevelle is probably it. I like a chunky looking tank, like a bouncer at a club thats as big as the door.

I think the Roadrunners/chargers have 'faster' lines on them, gives them an athletic build type while the Chevelles just a tank (aka bouncer).

Shortest wheelbase of the lot and my performance type is something that will leave a skyline GTR35 for dead on the street. 800 Horsepower should do it.

This is why power-weight ratio was my main concern (amongst the big 3) and why I wondered which would be lightest if no expense spared like the Cuda Highplains referred to. If I chucked 200,000 at a chevelle, 200,000 at a 68 charger... which will be the lightest/hardest accelerating car? I would assume more car/performance drag race and cornering out of the chevelle than a Mopar. With Hemi heads available for them as well.... probably comes down to the look at the end and once again, Im after a tank looking car.

My most favorite hotrod is the 1949 Mercury Lead Sled and that thing is a TANK. I think in muscle cars the only thing that comes close may very well be the CHevelle because of its butch like design, may be that is what drew me to the chevelle though i was a mopar guy all my life.

I think im done with my asking cause if i ask any more, il be posting another new car here, this time a 49 lead sled...

[BMR Sales]

Remember, all OEMs were working on Hemis during the muscle era. This is one instance where Chrysler was actually ahead of the curve. While Zora Arkus Duntov (father of the Corvette) made Hemi heads for the flat head Ford all the way back in the '20s, they were not an OEM option and never caught on big. When Chrysler first introduced their first Hemis in the early 50s they were the first of the Big 3 to offer them to the general public and produced them in volume for 5 years. Their high output power made them the preferred choice for drag racing but their heavy and expensive design made them a production nightmare, so they stopped them in production cars. Even the Adrun Ford heads had any number of problems with their design that limited their production from ever catching on in a large scale. By then the Big 3 were deep into OHV engine production, so the flatheads slowly faded away as a performance engine.
.

Zora Duntov was Born in 1909 and didn't come to the USA til after WW II, so I'm sure he wasn't making Heads in the '20s

[High Plains Mopars]

Thank you for the correction. Ardun heads didn't evolve until the late '40s, after WW2, as you stated.

Sorry, just my dates mixed up typing my rely.

[nekkidhillbilly]

Assuming the "more" consists of lightest, 1/4 mile, and handling, it can be all or it can be none. I have seen all three of these body styles in weight ranges from 3200 to 4200#. I've seen them with all with 20o cid six bangers to 600 cid mountain motors. Ive seen them wallow around corners like a drunken sailor and turn 20 second e.t.s while others can carve a corner like a Christmas turkey and slap you with a 9 second e.t.

BTW, you might want to update your title to Charger vs Chevelle. To a chevy guy, a B body is a Caprice and your Chevelle is an A body.



Here in is the crux of it all. Any car can be made uber light and mega powerful if you have the $$ to accomplish it. It just happens that for the vast majority of us, that can be most easily accomplished using a Chevy platform. This is because of the sheer number of these cars out there, the return on investment for someone to make specialized parts for a Chevy far outweighs the same effort for a Ford or Mopar, so there are going to be more selection at more price points for the Chevy.



Again, volume plays into the equation which means for most of us, cost is a factor. If it wasn't, we would all be building cars that were like the G-Force Cuda with no expense spared. The full frame deal, well most cars now are unitized and frames are regulated to trucks. Does that make it superior? Depends on the application and intention. Some very fast race cars are monocoque construction with no frame at all. Most saturday night racers are built on frames. I don't see this as a right or wrong situation.



Lots of opinions there along with some very historically sounds items. You are entitled to them given your set of wheels. Having raced all three of the US Big Three, I can tell you they all have distinct advantages and dis-advantages. Similarly, I've run into plenty of great people as well as a fair share of jerks within all three makes.




You certainly got taken to the cleaners in some of your earlier dealings, but you also had a very clean and smooth transaction with some great people when you acquired your last Charger. Like I said earlier, I've run into really good and really bad people of all makes. It isn't limited to just Mopars but there seems to be less range in the Mopar camp. The tend to be great, or major jerks. Not much in between. However, I can't disagree much with Mopar owners perception of value. I'll point out more towards that further below.



Here you are incorrect. The only company that makes suspension parts for all three makes is Hotchkis. Otherwise, almost all of these aftermarket companies concentrate on usually one specific brand. Detroit Speed is starting to get into some Ford parts, but currently, sticking to one car make will limit you suspension choices to a select number of vendors who chose different ways to address the factory shortcoming.




I missed that thread but something you haven't considered here is the ease of making that power. The opposed valve layout of the Hemi means it makes that power more efficiently than a comparable wedge at any power level, not just at nitro racing levels. Look at what a Kaase Boss 9 can put out. The same can be said about multi-cam motors who also have opposed valves. Ford and Pontiac were all also playing with Hemi motors in the late 60s early 70s, but outside forces all conspired to kill their programs before they gained much name recognition. However, as engineers have learned more about engines in the 40 years since the muscle era, additional means of efficiency have come about which is how new muscle cars are able to make as much stock power as the classics, and do so without the mileage and drive-ability sacrifice.




Better at what? These are all considered mid sized cars. A few inches here, a couple pounds there are not going to make huge differences between them, depending on how they are being utilized. Obviously if they are in an autocross designed for Miatas, they all have a huge dis-advantage. If they are on an open road race like the Silver State, the longer wheelbase is an advantage.



You may actually be correct. A friend of mine asked me about helping him sell his Falcon recently. I agreed and began researching pricing thinking his car was an easy $18-20k model. Nope, its worth about $12k tops. Coming from a predominately Mopar background, I was surprised by how inexpensive it can be to get into a Falcon. Torinos are pretty decently priced too. Much better than any Mopar or 1st Gen Camaro or even some of the Chevelles I've seen. However, when you start looking at making significant modifications form stock, aftermarket support can really alter the total cost in involved to build any of them.



I'll give you the most popular engine in the small block. Of course until recently it required you replace most of the factory parts to get it to respectable power levels, but yes, there are 100 million small block chevys out there. That's a lot. I think the simple breadth of all the brands they own would naturally make GM the biggest auto maker for 8 decades. No big secret there. Par it down to any single marque and it changes drastically. Bought and sold, well, if that's a criteria, then bankruptcy also counts and we should all be Ford fans.

How else should we slice this? how about within the classic muscle car era from 1965 to 1974? Nascar Manufacturers championships: Chrysler products-4, Ford products-3, GM products-2. Since we like cars that turn right and left and stop well here, how about Trans Am; Ford products-3, GM products-3, AMC-2, Chrysler-0. NHRA; how would we even begin here. Pro stock didn't really begin until the muscle cars were disappearing. Stock and Super stock may be the ticket, but there was never really a national championship in these catagories in that time frame. Certainly the 409 vs Mopar Super Stocks races are legendary and for all intent, Ford pushed the creation of funny cars with the tube chassis FX/A Comets. But it was the Hemi powered Mopars that dominated SS/A classes for the better part of 40 years.



For the last 100 years, there have only been 4 ways to spring a vehicle; leaf, coil, torsion, and air. Have you got some new, yet to be released technology to add to that list? There are some advantages/disadvantages to different methods, but they are all effective to some degree or we wouldn't still be using them. I'd also contend that just because you have the newest, lightest, most sophisticated spring package doesn't necessarily mean you are going to be the fastest one around the track and unless you are competing where you need to constantly adjust rates or pivots, most street drivers really don't need much more than basic set ups, even those of us who fancy ourselves as performance drivers.

well you can do like i did and buy a buick they share almost everything with your chevelle. get one that has solid body and your good. the buick engines make ungodly power in the tq dept to boot. you can find a solid skylark for a few thousand.

[Removed user as requested]

Keeping the chevelle. To me its the ultimate in muscle like bulk. No other muscle car looks like a straight out tank like the 70 chevelle.

[1965gp]

The 70 Chevelle has become extremely popular lately- even more than it has in the past.

About 5-10 years ago my dad read an article on collecting cars and it said the 70 Chevelle was the next '57 Chevy- guess they knew what they were talking about.

[High Plains Mopars]

well you can do like i did and buy a buick they share almost everything with your chevelle. get one that has solid body and your good. the buick engines make ungodly power in the tq dept to boot. you can find a solid skylark for a few thousand.


I think you meant to refer this to G-Man. I'm not in the market for an A body.

If I was to pick up an A body, it would probably be a '68-69 Chevelle or a '70 GTO Judge. Although the Stage 1 Buick vs the Hemi debate certainly makes a case for massive torque.

I think my next car may be a '53 Studebaker Starliner or a '33 Dodge Bros LD6. Of course, I still have the V8 Stealth idea rolling around in the back of my head too.

[Schwartz Performance]

The only way to find out which one will be "better" is to throw 200k at each of them, and compete head to head with the performance figures like Car and Driver publishes. Then whichever one wins, you keep. Sounds less stressful than just talking about it an having a debate, right? ;)

-Dale

[Removed user as requested]

lol Dale.

Let me know when someone who can afford to do that, does it. Until then... Chevy, here i come!

Tony, You have some interesting taste. Totally not me.

If I ever go a hot rod which I doubt I ever will, the 1949 Mercury, chop top with the long hood like the Baby Lincoln is the only one to get.

http://www.cars-on-line.com/39263.html

Wonder how heavy these are?

[LS6 Tommy]

bit of mopar hatin going on. some words of inspiration: HEMI, 6 pack, best gearbox built, made some of the best looking muscle cars, had one of the best factory suspension setups, rarely gets beaten in a straight line...

Best gear box & suspension?? Rarely beaten in a straight line (except for the Hemi)?? Ummm, No... The showroom stock GM cars of the late 60's & early 70's routinely equaled or beat their Mopar competition in the 1/4 mile. Mopars were terrible in Trans Am, too, which IMO is the race series that most closely matched the parameters Pro-Touring builders strive to improve upon today. Maybe Mopar had the STRONGEST gearbox, (Hemi 4 speed) but it's nowhere as good shifting as a Muncie. Those trannies never road raced well. The suspensions are interesting, but far from "the best". I agree that Mopar gave the best optional rear suspension parts for drag racing, but those Unibody chassis were just too flexible to get a good suspension under them to make them really handle well. That being said, I'm only speaking about the stock vehicles and I'm absolutely not a Mopar hater. All of the above issues can be relatively easily rectified with modern aftermarket products, but it will take a LOT more money and effort.

Tommy

[nekkidhillbilly]

I think you meant to refer this to G-Man. I'm not in the market for an A body.

If I was to pick up an A body, it would probably be a '68-69 Chevelle or a '70 GTO Judge. Although the Stage 1 Buick vs the Hemi debate certainly makes a case for massive torque.

I think my next car may be a '53 Studebaker Starliner or a '33 Dodge Bros LD6. Of course, I still have the V8 Stealth idea rolling around in the back of my head too.

yes that was for the op. my next car will be a c body buick or caddi.

[High Plains Mopars]

Best gear box & suspension?? Rarely beaten in a straight line (except for the Hemi)?? Ummm, No... The showroom stock GM cars of the late 60's & early 70's routinely equaled or beat their Mopar competition in the 1/4 mile. Mopars were terrible in Trans Am, too, which IMO is the race series that most closely matched the parameters Pro-Touring builders strive to improve upon today. Maybe Mopar had the STRONGEST gearbox, (Hemi 4 speed) but it's nowhere as good shifting as a Muncie. Those trannies never road raced well. The suspensions are interesting, but far from "the best". I agree that Mopar gave the best optional rear suspension parts for drag racing, but those Unibody chassis were just too flexible to get a good suspension under them to make them really handle well. That being said, I'm only speaking about the stock vehicles and I'm absolutely not a Mopar hater. All of the above issues can be relatively easily rectified with modern aftermarket products, but it will take a LOT more money and effort.

Tommy

Maybe you missed my follow up to this from this part of the thread, but how exactly do we define championship caliber cars in NHRA during the muscle car time period? Stock, super stock, AFX? Its too difficult to say and much harder to slice to define what makes and models were on top and the pecking order changed every weekend. Every make was winning on any given weekend.

IMO, the 727 Torqueflite was actually a much more game changing transmission than the A833 4 spd. As you pointed out, the 4spd, even Hemi versions, had issues, where as the Torqueflite pioneered the automatic as a viable drag race transmission.

I'd also take issue with saying the Mopars were terrible in Trans am. Please define the time period as it seem you are referring to 1970 exclusively. Did you know Mopars won 50% of the over 5 liter TA races held in 1966? They continued to win and regularly place in the top 5 into the first part of 1967 before Ford, Mercury, and Chevrolet starting providing factory support to their teams. Without the factory support, it would have been a different story because of the front suspensions. Mopars actually had negative camber gain under compression, unlike the 65-67 Mustangs and 67 Camaros, which went positive. The exact opposite of what you want in a handling design. Without the Shelby mods or Guldstrand mods, the GM and Ford guys unibody cars would have continued to to battle with the mopars for the top spots. But once Ford and GM stepped into the game, the die was cast for the next three years. By the time the Chrysler factory guys decided to play in 1970, they were three years behind in development work, but they still managed top 5 finishes in every race but 2, and qualified as well or better. Not bad for a last ditch, late to the party effort.

I'm not a GM or Ford hater and I've driven both in competition. It is just stock to stock, they are a bit further behind the mopar designs than you might think. Its the simple mass of the cars available and popularity of them both today that have driven so much continued development on them. I'd contend in pure stock form, the mopars will more than hold their own. Start changing things, and the Fords will slowly creep ahead while the Chevys will rocket forward.

[mikedc]

My two cents:

Develop any of these cars very far, and you will end up building a custom-made rectangular tube chassis and Corvette control arms. The platform becomes a set of wheelbase dimensions and the outer skin.


Engines:

Decades of aftermarket development and mass production cost reductions will outweigh anything about how they were originally designed. The only question is how much money are you willing to throw at it.

[LS6 Tommy]

I didn't see your reply, I just logged back on, but I will be sure to read it immediately. I'm not arguing with you. For drag racing, I stated factory showroom cars pretty clearly. No one will argue the Hemi's were untouchable in modified classes. Automatics transmissions don't figure as far as I was talking about how Mopar trannies figure into the vision of Pro-Touring cars emulating road race cars, not Mopar's place in car making history. In any event, Mopar's involvement in Trans Am was far from a "last ditch, late entry". They did well in 66, Plymouth & Dodge finished 2nd & 3rd. In 67 Dodge finished dead last in class. 68 & 69 they were out of it & for the one year MOPAR really got back into it full-bore, they finished 4th & 5th out of 5 manufacturers, WAY behind 3rd place in points.

Tommy

[Removed user as requested]

Just having look at some 454ci crate prices... $4200 for a 450hp 520ftlbs torque motor?
Are you serious?

I dont remember prices that low when i had my dodge. Whats a 440ci crate around that power and torque cost? Maybe i read stuff wrong. If not... thats awesome.

[High Plains Mopars]

Tommy,

If we look at only showroom stock tyes of cars in NHRA, that could still encompass stock and super stock classes back then. Even so, NHRA did not begin an accummulative points system for sportsman classes to award an overall championship until 1974. Prior to that, who ever won the World Finals was called the national champion, even if they DNF the rest of the races over the course of the year.

My point about the Trans Am series was that in 1966 when the O-2 class was predominately privateers with minimal factory support, Chrysler cars did well. Once the corporate dudes from Ford, Mercury, and Chevy joined in '67 and brought out the big guns out, the game changed. Chrysler pulled what little support they did provide and did not come back to play until 1970. So while they started out in the game, they pulled out of SCCA to support their Nascar and NHRA drivers until the series had so much momentum it could not be ignored. So maybe they weren't late to the party, they actually were early, but they left early for a beer run and didn't get back until all the the set up for beer pong champions was already at its peak.


G-man,

yes, that is the reality of building a Chevy engine. Chevy's will always outpower the competition in $$ per horsepower production.

[LS6 Tommy]

I might have been vague about the drag racing, too. When I said Showroom Stock, I wasn't referring to any class of organized racing. I was talking about comparison performance testing of factory bone stock cars in 1/4 mile tests, like magazine shootouts. in any event, I think we're pretty much on the same page. I think you can see I don't "hate" Mopars. Heck, there are cars form every maker I'd LOVE to have...


Tommy

[benno505]

Just having look at some 454ci crate prices... $4200 for a 450hp 520ftlbs torque motor?
Are you serious?

I dont remember prices that low when i had my dodge. Whats a 440ci crate around that power and torque cost? Maybe i read stuff wrong. If not... thats awesome.

440 is a better motor, pay for what you get i spose

[Removed user as requested]

440 is a better motor, pay for what you get i spose

By what standard is a 440ci better than a 454ci chev motor?

Last time i checked with engine builders building engines for drag racing cars (2000 or more horsepower) were surprised how many passes the chev engines could do before needing a rebuild. Once pulled apart they looked like they were still good. They were the most reliable engine.

So... how is the 440 a 'better' motor and what is that based on?

Cost wise, get what you pay for... that is null and void to. If one company can sell more because more people want their product than someone else product, then more volume is moving thus bringing prices down. Thats how business works.

Now if we go by that, more people want chev engines thus cheaper as more volume moving... that can also be said to mean that they are better engines, which coincides with what engine builders said about their reliability and if that was not the case, why do "more" people want these 'worse engines' which drives the prices down?

To be honest... the most reliable car i ever owned was a pontiac that had a chevy engine. After that i got into dodges and all i ever had was problems. 8 years of problems.

A lot of people like to think something 'rare' makes it the thing to get, better etc. Hence why own a cheap rubbish chevrolet, when there are milions when you can own a Mopar, expensive, rarer etc.

Simple logic as follows:

Mopars are rarer simply because everyone in the 60s and 70s wanted to own a chevrolet. If they wanted to own mopars then the chevrolets would have been rarer. This tells me chevrolet is better because simple fact is more people wanted them. Now, the result of this is reflected in cost. Mopar parts cost the most because there is not enough demand for them, so prices are expensive which is reflective of the fact everyone wanted chevrolets.

So less of them is the reason the parts cost more. Why they are rarer, probably because they werent as good hence everyone wanted the chevrolets out of showrooms as they were the better car and the bonus of that for us today is simply lower cost as there is higher demand.

Good thing is, im not brand loyal. I owned more dodges than anything else. I also owned fords, a pontiac and now my very first chevrolet. So im looking at things from an unbiased perspective.

Owning a dodge i thought was cool because less of them. All i found out was, it aint cool having to pay double for the exact same thing someone else can get for their chevy.

So mopars are rarer because nobody wanted them. Parts cost huge for the few that did want them. So bad + bad. Not very good if you ask me.

[raustinss]

Finally someone spits out some logic which has been painfully obvious to me for years....like since it was probably in my teens...!

[benno505]

do some research, 440 vs 454 vs 460, all 3 engines with similiar components, the mopar 440 produces more power for less, stronger block, does not require 4 bolt mains, produces more torque than the other 2.

got nothing to do with rarity.

[benno505]

some info for you, feel free to check into it more and will be proved over and over. this is just one i found for you.


Big-Block Shootout: Pt 6
The Results are In!




It was an interesting way to start the morning; walking in to the Westech dyno shop and seeing the three monster Big-Block Shootout V-8s fully decked-out for battle assured one unshakable truth: It was going to be a fun day. Obviously, we have been working toward this goal for about six months now, and the planning began much earlier still, so to see the results all together in the same place brought several feelings out. The first and foremost feeling was relief.

Relief meant all three engines were completed on time and had been transported to the right shop on the right day. Relief meant all three engine builders were present and confident about their creations. Relief meant John Baechtel told us he'd secured all of the necessary exhaust, bellhousing, flywheel, and dyno input shaft changes required to run all three engines in one long day on his excellent SuperFlow engine dyno. Now, it was time for some eagerly-awaited anticipation and excitement.

THE FORD 460
Mark Sanchez of Automotive Engineering West crafted the Dearborn representative to our event. His final incarnation of the 460 certainly delivered the goods. Once final tuning and timing had been accomplished, the largest-displacement V-8 entered in our contest had churned out 618 hp (at 6,100 rpm) and 554 lb-ft of torque at 4,600 rpm. The torque curve needs a new name, as it had very little curvature at all. From our beginning sample rpm of 3,500 all the way to 6,500 where we stopped, the 460 cranked out over 500 lb-ft. Mark Sanchez was satisfied with the results, but still wanted more.


"We flowed the heads after they had been pocket ported, and we got about 315 cfm out of them. We feel these heads are capable of 630 hp and our 618 number shows we're close. Still, that's plenty of power for 92 octane, and whoever wins this engine better have some serious suspension under the car."

You may also notice a Weiand Stealth intake manifold under the Demon, as opposed to the Edelbrock Victor unit we described in the engine build a couple months ago. This switch was a last-minute replacement when Mark was about to port the intake, and discovered it was designed for a 429 SCJ, not the 460. The port misalignment was severe, of course, so the Stealth was the only intake he had readily available to port match.

"I know I'll be sacrificing some top end by going to the dual plane, but the Stealth is about the best dual-plane I've worked with. If there is a sacrifice, it will be small and it will be on the very top end. We added the 1-inch spacer on top of the intake for more plenum volume, and I feel this combination will actually gain more in the midrange than we'd lose on the top end. This contest is about peak power, but please take a good look at our torque curve. I think you'll like what you see."

We did look at the torque curve and as Mark predicted, it was amazingly flat. This Ford may not have won the Shootout, but we're sure it'll win some fans on the street.

THE CHEVY 454
Being one of the most popular big-blocks ever, the 454 Chevy is loaded with both potential and the aftermarket expertise to exploit it. Certainly we've shown you plenty of solid big-block buildups here in PHR, but we could only estimate the final power outputs on our giveaway Rat. We all hovered around the 625hp-range, and as the 454 began to sing on the dyno, we were all silenced as numbers in the 640 range popped up on the screen. We got even more pumped up when we compared the fuel flow between the front and rear bowls, and determined the motor wanted more gas. We knew even greater power would follow.


After giving the bad Bow Tie all it wanted to drink, the final reward was 657 hp at both 6,300 and 6,400 rpm. Like the Ford, the Chevy pulled more than 500 lb-ft of torque from 3,500-6,500 rpm, peaking at 562 at 5,800 rpm.

We were very happy with these numbers, especially considering they were produced by a hydraulic-roller equipped 454 on pump gas! Our own Red Line 540ci Merlin laid down 670 hp in a similar configuration, but required the added cost of a stroker crank and a solid roller setup to do so. This 454 was built with a GM Performance Parts block, crankshaft, and connecting rods, so you can see the potential of the big-block hiding in your garage. Engine builder Paul Pfaff was pleased with the performance.

"You know we're going to give you hell about giving us a hydraulic roller when the other guys had solids, right? But, we did really well. We'd tested this engine on our own dyno and got about 640 out of it without fine-tuning. We knew it was a good one, but we didn't know if 640 would be enough to win this thing. Seeing 657 horses here is really good, especially on 92 octane."

Paul is right about the hydraulic roller, as the Chevy was the only engine to have one. The Ford and Mopar ended up with solid rollers, but that wasn't the plan. Initially, we'd hoped to have hydraulic rollers in all three engines, and since the Chevy was assembled first, the plan was still fine then. Once the Mopar and the Ford had determined their camshaft needs were far beyond the range of off-the-shelf hydraulic rollers currently available for their respective engines, we conceded and gave them solids. However, the specifications on all the cams were similar.

To try and level the playing field a little, the Chevy was given an electric water pump for its pulls while the Mopar and Ford were forced to turn their pumps with belt-driven pulleys, which we knew would cost some power.

THE MOPAR 440
Dick Landy showed up with plenty on his mind. His brother and business partner Mike Landy had been hurt in a non-racing-related accident a few days earlier, and Dick needed to get to the hospital to see him. His condition had improved since the accident, but things were still pretty serious. We shared his concern and hoped to have some good news for Dick to bring Mike.


The 440 fired easily and idled wonderfully at 850 rpm. It had the most civilized idle of all three engines, and we were about floored when the 440s first pull delivered 653 horses before any tuning. We asked Dick if he'd tuned the engine on his own in-house dyno, and he said he hadn't, due to a computer glitch and the issues with his brother. After adding a bit of timing and leaning out the jets a bit, the Mopar came to life on the top end. The final tally was the death knell for the competition, as the underrated 440 screamed up to 6,800 rpm after delivering 684 hp! The Mopar won on all counts, maintaining 582 lb-ft of torque at 5,500-5,800 rpm. We've never seen a naturally-aspirated 92-octane 440 ever make power like this before, and we were duly impressed.

"These things run pretty good. We know the heads can breathe up there. They're not as good as the B1s, but they can run well. Our valvetrain isn't nice and easy to change ratios on like the other guys, but it is really stable since it's a shaft setup. We can't go much past 1.6:1 without it costing a lot. Where are the other guys? 1.7:1, 1.8:1? We're at 1.6:1, and that's it. So, we're happy it did well. I'd have liked one of those electric water pumps too. We've done back-to-back tests, and that's worth at least 20 horses on a 440."

[Removed user as requested]

That doesn't prove anything.

20 horsepower difference and probably weighs more to negating any advantage in a practical sense. And? That cancels out in performance sense.

I bet the Mopar cost 2x the price as well. If we built them dollar for dollar, the 454 would have easily been over 750HP.

Also, we do not know what these tests are there for, what the motive behind it is, what they are trying to market across etc.

I have seen max Horsepower challenges where John Kaase has dominated with Ford motors. Mopar got owned severe.

So is Ford now number 1?

Also this does not even say how easily the engine lives at that power level. As stated before, Eastern Creek, I know engine builders that are surprised that the chev engines can make more passes before rebuild than other engines. So reliability in Chevrolet is there.

Development practically ended with mopars 40 years ago while Chev keeps upgrading technology, and todays technology is far superior to old technology, and Mopar here fall behind.

Tests like this prove nothing, sadly.

All I know is, You spend 20,000 on your Mopar motor, I spend 20,000 on a chev motor and then we can compare what is what... and as Tony has already said, Chev will ALWAYS win $$$ per HP. Yeah the article said that the 440 made 20hp more. Shame it didn't say it cost twice as much to get an extra 20hp... makes me wonder if its so good why does it cost twice the amount to achieve the same thing, which again ends up coming back to what I said before, stuff costs because nobody wants them.

Funny thing about articles is that I can find where chev ford and mopar dominate. It is all based on who tested, how they tested, what motive they have behind testing, and whatever else.

The only thing we can not argue is cost. Dollar for dollar, mopar will always be the worst of the lot. They take more $$$ to be 'as' good.

Example:

572ci Hemi Crate motor. "the king of Horsepower".
650 Horsepower and 660 ft/lbs of torque. Cost, $17,649.

572ci Chev Big block crate.
745 Horsepower and 710 ft/lbs of torque. Cost, $10,999.

745HP vs 650HP
710ftlbs vs 660ftlbs
$10,999 vs $17,649

Some how I love the fact that I can spend far less and get far more. I bet 99% of society fits in that. *shrugs*

[benno505]

actually building bbc and bbm are pretty closely priced, you have to put a bit more into chevy motor ( especially strengthening) to get the same HP the mopar makes.

your prices are on hemis, that's apples vs oranges mate.
do a 440 wedge price
and people don't give a f**k you got a 572 chebbie, but tell them its a 572 hemi and you already won the show.

check this link out: 505" mopar $10k 700hp/685 tq http://www.musclemotorsracing.com/engines/killer-krate.html
or 596" (which is a little closer to you 572 chebbie, but this is $23k and it makes 1150hp http://www.musclemotorsracing.com/engines/top-krate.html

this is getting boring, for the record I don't hate chebbies but when naïve people come here and talk crap about mopars it gets on my nerves a bit.
you have picked your car so lets move on

[Removed user as requested]

actually building bbc and bbm are pretty closely priced, you have to put a bit more into chevy motor ( especially strengthening) to get the same HP the mopar makes.

your prices are on hemis, that's apples vs oranges mate.
do a 440 wedge price
and people don't give a f**k you got a 572 chebbie, but tell them its a 572 hemi and you already won the show.

check this link out: 505" mopar $10k 700hp/685 tq http://www.musclemotorsracing.com/engines/killer-krate.html
or 596" (which is a little closer to you 572 chebbie, but this is $23k and it makes 1150hp http://www.musclemotorsracing.com/engines/top-krate.html

this is getting boring, for the record I don't hate chebbies but when naïve people come here and talk crap about mopars it gets on my nerves a bit.
you have picked your car so lets move on

I owned both. I believe i am fairly well informed what dodge stuff costs. How does a car show 572 hemi mean anything? See you are arguing perception vs reality. If you did not hate chevrolets you would be writing the name correctly and not the way you do as though to insult it which is evident in the whole 'car show' comment made. I never talked crap about Mopars. I stated a fact. They do cost way more to do. The crap talking is "they cost more because they are better" which you stated. False information. They cost more because less volume, demand, NOT because they are better. I like both, i just stated one costs less because more popular. You stated the price as reflective of the idea how mopars just rule common cheap junk (aka chevrolet). So if anyone is crap talking buddy... it is another Mopar guy thinking his car is made of Gold.

[High Plains Mopars]

G-Man, you have to admit that it is somewhat ironic that someone that was talking about building $200,000 muscle cars is suddenly the cheerleader for Chevy performance value.

Your Mopar experience was less than enjoyable, we get it. Let it go. You don't need to imply that Mopars owners are delusional because we don't see the world the way you do now. Not all of our experiences with Mopars are the same as yours have been. I can recall as many bad Chevy guy stories as you have Mopar stories. Lets just leave it at that.

Playing with cars is about passions. There are as many intrinsic and personal reasons to chose the makes and models we play with as there are personal opinions about them. In that regard, it isn't much different than other relationships we have. Are you friends with everyone you meet, no. There are certain aspects that attract you to certain people or not. Cars aren't much different for many of the members on this forum. That may not hold true for the general populace, but on here it does.You would probably get less of a fight by insulting someones girlfriend than their car.

This thread was opened for you to solicit opinions. Now you are being provided those opinions and your response is telling guys why their opinions are wrong. Our perceptions are our realities. Sometimes these align with others, often times they don't. You have made your choice of make and model. Why continue to argue the point.

As a musician, you understand that playing music is a precise skill that must be exercised with discipline and exactness. If you miss a note in a sequence, it does not sound right and influences the whole piece. Cars and horsepower are not like that. You cannot simply arrange it all in dollars and power and performance criteria and then make a statement that this is best and this is not. It is not as exact as that and it can vary on any given day with any set of circumstances. Who cares if it is cheap or expensive, if it makes 300 horsepower or 700 horsepower. If it makes someone one happy, great. More power to them.

You have found the Chevrolet light and the universe has aligned itself for you. I'm glad for you and I hope your Chevelle is everything you want it to be.

Benno, he has picked his car, lets move on and realize there is one less demand for a classic Mopar now. There is no point in presenting any additional information here.

[lucky13firebird]

I'd say chevelle. I'm coming from a poor man perspective. My wife's dream car is a 68 charger and someday I'll build one with a 400 stroker. Why the 400? The bore is wider than the 440 and it's a shorter deck block, the car will simply handle better. Dodge has **** for brakes so I'll have to spend an Arm and a leg on wildwood brakes. Nothing against wilwood, just can't afford them... and they have leaf springs, which serve me well in.my street terror firebird, but most guys prefer a 4 link setup in their 1st Gen gm f bodys....

Now on to the chevelle/pontiac gto... factory 4 link, all you need is beefier parts, your choice, then throw on some corvette brakes and a 12 bolt rear with 98 camaro brakes on the back, then box the frame. Find an Ls or lax swap, whatever you can afford and make sure and get the t56 with it... eBay turbo kit ( a dime a dozen) and you got a 4 wheel disc, 4 link bulletproof, screamer for under 15-20 k that'll throw down with a lot more expensive cars, bodywork at your discretion.... you can't build a 15k Mopar that can throw down with a 15k ford or chevy... just cant.

[Removed user as requested]

Tony,

I am not arguing that Chevrolet is better than Mopar. As you said, 200k muscle car etc. I am still mixed feelings about charger/chevelle and probably will be until i get the chevelle.

What I was defending against was "mopar is better, you get what you pay for, chevrolet is cheap common junk" etc.

To me car is car, they are personal opinions like music. You dont just go around saying Bach is better than Mozart or vice versa. They were both composers, they both wrote extremely complex music and it is stupid to say one is better than other. All you can say in fairness is "i like the sound of this persons music more".

Car is same. Chevrolet, Mopar. They both have engines, wheels, bodies etc. You cant say mopar is better or worse, chevy is cheap common junk as to what started the whole thing. You can say you like mopar more because there are less of them. Thats an opinion and nothing wrong with it. But to try use opinions as facts, such as, well chevy costs less in motors because its worse quality, thats bull. Thats what im defending. They cost less because more available. To me there both good, one does cost 100% more being less common, thats also true. Dollar for dollar the chev is better, that is also true. However if its not a car one likes, as you said, not everything can be broken down to dollars, if it could be, we would not have mopars, everyone would have a chev.

So both are good, its not like one breaks down every time you drive while the other does not which would state one as better than other in terms of actual quality. One just pays 100% more for Mopar.

I asked what made Mopar better (looking for quality here, an actual thing that can say it is better), what I got was price, not common or boring etc, which is opinions rather than an actual quality reason. That is what i was against. Price is to do with demand, not quality even though quality was the thing argued "you get what you pay for spose". So i pay less for chev because its worse... how so? That is why i asked for actual quality, factual things not made up rubbish and that is what the argument was. In fact, that is why I wanted to know ultimately what engine was better, made a larger torque curve etc even if it cost 100% more to do and as far as i know, it was said both would be identical with the chevrolet being lighter. So if a mopar 440 wedge stroked to 500+ci, or a mopar hemi 572ci from indy can make a power curve from 2500rpm 6000rpm at over 700HP and torque maxing at 800 a chev engine of the same size if built, not just a crate motor, can also be made to make the same figures across the same amount of RPMs.

Seems according to beno though, the mopars will always be ahead even if it cost 100% more. So a 500ci mopar will always make more torque over a larger curve than a chev (putting price aside). Well do they?

What about reliability, will mopars live as long as chevs, are they nice to live with or are they temperamental?

To me these things determine better as these are actual quality things.

[benno505]

move on brother. a bit of misinterpretation going on

[LS6 Tommy]

Benno compares a solid roller, Indy head 440 to a Merlin head, hydraulic roller 454 that only made 27 horsepower less. :dunno: That deck of cards is just LITTLE stacked, even with the BBC being allowed to have an electric water pump...

Tommy

[benno505]

like i mentioned this was only one piece of information, feel free to search more, you will find at least 20 stating the same as i have said. this post was abandoned, feel free to leave it to. as OP is naive and just trolling i think.