testtest

Yeh, it really is NASCAR!

Had a few muscles in my day too although I wasn't one much for street racing. We would on occasion go out west of town on a pretty deserted two lane road and do some nightime dragging for bragging rights. I had a couple pretty fast pieces, one I'm especially proud of ......... a '55 2dr Chevy 210 body with a home built Z28 302ci small block. Every part inside that motor was hand rubbed to blue print specs then assembled with ultimate care in our back yard garage. With a Muncie 4sp tranny I could lift the front wheels off the ground in 2 gears anytime on street tires, and the 3rd gear on occasion when I hit everything just right.

Before that one I had a very late production run '61 'bubble top' two door Impala .... 409ci/409hp that had been used often to prove the worth of that 409 (meaning it was pretty much used up). Soon after I bought it I upgraded to a 63 model 409ci, 2 4bbl's making it something around 425hp.

The '55 was actually a little quicker due to better gearing (411:1 vs 373:1) and because it was a little lighter weight, but both were true muscle cars that held their own on most any evening run. However ...... neither fit the bill of my first love of 'round d round' racing. Fast as these two cars were and as much as I loved them, they wouldn't turn left in a hurry for nothing !!!! :)
:):)
 
jumpinjoe said:
Had a few muscles in my day too although I wasn't one much for street racing. We would on occasion go out west of town on a pretty deserted two lane road and do some nightime dragging for bragging rights. I had a couple pretty fast pieces, one I'm especially proud of ......... a '55 2dr Chevy 210 body with a home built Z28 302ci small block. Every part inside that motor was hand rubbed to blue print specs then assembled with ultimate care in our back yard garage. With a Muncie 4sp tranny I could lift the front wheels off the ground in 2 gears anytime on street tires, and the 3rd gear on occasion when I hit everything just right.

Before that one I had a very late production run '61 'bubble top' two door Impala .... 409ci/409hp that had been used often to prove the worth of that 409 (meaning it was pretty much used up). Soon after I bought it I upgraded to a 63 model 409ci, 2 4bbl's making it something around 425hp.

The '55 was actually a little quicker due to better gearing (411:1 vs 373:1) and because it was a little lighter weight, but both were true muscle cars that held their own on most any evening run. However ...... neither fit the bill of my first love of 'round d round' racing. Fast as these two cars were and as much as I loved them, they wouldn't turn left in a hurry for nothing !!!! :)
:):)
Click to expand...
Built a .302 and put it in an El Camino. Also had a Muncie 4 speed. Ended up trading that car for a Mach 1 with a built 351 Cleveland.
 
Bassbob said:
Well, the El Camino needed a lot of body work and the Mustang was cherry. And stupid fast.
Click to expand...
Typical GM that's why I sold my Chevelle in 1981 before it needed too much body work.




thumbnail 16.jpg
 
Bassbob said:
Well, the El Camino needed a lot of body work and the Mustang was cherry. And stupid fast.
Click to expand...
Hey, I was just jerkin' yer chain a little ............... although I'm am far more partial to the Chevy SB than anything Ford ever made. But hey, that's just me !!! We all have opinions of cars/trucks. Some of us just have better opinions !!! ;););):)
 
HansGruber said:
And make ‘em turn right..

Half those drivers’ brains would likely explode, though…
Click to expand...
At Daytona they could by using the infield circut that the IMSA cars use for their 24 hr race.

And they could do the same at Indy on the infield F1 course.

If the NASCAR drivers had to drive a oval for 24 hrs they would get too dizzy to stand up.
 
jumpinjoe said:
Hey, I was just jerkin' yer chain a little ............... although I'm am far more partial to the Chevy SB than anything Ford ever made. But hey, that's just me !!! We all have opinions of cars/trucks. Some of us just have better opinions !!! ;););):)
Click to expand...
I know brother. I like them all. For trucks I am really a Ford guy ( although I currently drive a Dodge) but I have had plenty of all of them. The 302 was a great motor, but it isn't my favorite chevy small block. The 400 was.
 
Bassbob said:
I know brother. I like them all. For trucks I am really a Ford guy ( although I currently drive a Dodge) but I have had plenty of all of them. The 302 was a great motor, but it isn't my favorite chevy small block. The 400 was.
Click to expand...
Oh yeh, the 400 SB was a top notch motor for many applications. Overall for most uses I guess my all time favorite would have to be the hard core 350 ci. Man, even though it wasn't a real high performer off the shelf, it could be turned into one relatively easy. But more than that it was just so damned versatile.

Of course it really depends on a particular use as to which one is favored. For example, air boaters who run car motors on their boats all swear by the 383 stroker motor. Tons of torque on the low end with reliable hp as the rpm's climb without overturning it. For shear power at most levels the 572 or the 602. 'Course those are big blocks. We all know there's no substitution for displacement.

But I just always had a soft spot in my heart for that little 302 'Z' motor from about 1968-69. For a small block motor they just wouldn't give up in most anything short of a Sherman tank !!! I didn't do it often but that little motor we built for my '55 would jump up to 7000+ rpm in short order and PDQ. And it would be pulling hard all the way up. They were conservatively rated at 290hp (?) by GM, but rumor had it in many circles at somewhere around just under 400.

Dang I really miss those days ........................... and cars !!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top