Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.
659 messages, Last post on Jun 21, 2006 at 2:03 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
the first 4-door musclecar was the 1973 Pontiac Grand Am. The Grand Am took over top billing from the GTO that year, and while most of them were coupes, they did build a few thousand 4-doors. So think of it as a 4-door GTO. But prior to 1973, there were plenty of high-performance packages available on regular passenger cars. For example, way back in 1957, Oldsmobile offered a package called the J-2. It was a triple-2bbl setup on an Olds 377, or whatever displacement Olds was using that year. Put out something like 300 hp, and was a real screamer. Being an engine package, and not an actual model, it was available on any body style, so you could even get a 4-door or station wagon J-2. That same year, Dodge offered two packages. One was called the D-500. It was a 325 Hemi with either a 4-bbl or dual quad, I can't remember which. Then there was the D-501, which was a 354 Hemi with dual quads and, IIRC, 330 hp. Again, these were just engine packages, and could be had in any model, right down to a cheap Coronet 2-door sedan. In contrast Plymouth, DeSoto, and Chrysler fielded low-production high-peformance musclecars, the Fury, Adventurer, and 300C. Sure, the term hadn't been coined yet, but essentially that's what they were: high performance cars with beefed up suspensions, improved steering, wheels and tires, and high-output (not just big displacement) motors. Then, there was Chevy, which had a 283 with 270 hp, using dual quads in 1957, or 283 hp with fuel injection. I believe you could get these engines with any body style, not just the coupes and convertibles. And Pontiac was offering some multiple-carb options in the late 50's and 60's, which I don't think were limited to any one body style. As for the Charger, even when it was introduced, it wasn't a pure muscle car in the vein of the GTO. It was actually more of a cross between personal luxury coupe and musclecar. And they were available with just about any engine, whereas something like a GTO would've always started off with a 389 or 400, and a Roadrunner would start off with a 383. You could actually get a 225 Slant Six or a 318-2bbl in a Charger. That's not exactly a musclecar. |
|
|
But wouldn't the first "muscle car" with a special name, powertrain and unique trim that was a four-door be the 1957 Rambler Rebel? It was available in only one color (silver, with gold anodized trim "stripes" on side) and in one bodystyle (a four-door hardtop). It came only with AMC's hottest engine. stickguy: The original Chrysler "letter series" 300s were never available as four-door sedans or hardtops. Chrysler did bring out a tamer "non-letter series" 300 in 1962 to capitalize on the 300s image, and those were available as four-door hardtops.
|
|
| I had totally forgotten about the Rambler Rebel! Yeah, I guess, then, that it could be considered the first 4-door musclecar. | |
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 17, 2005 10:48 am) Dusty |
|
|
...you didn't think I'd forget about the Rambler, did you? Somebody has to remember poor old AMC. dustyk: I guess it depends on how one defines "muscle car." To me, a muscle car should at least have a unique name, trim and drivetrain compared to its more pedestrian counterparts. Many people, for example, consider the first Olds 88 to be the first "muscle car." I view it as a regular model that offered exceptional performance for the time, thanks to its ohv V-8. The first Olds muscle car, in my view, was the F-85 based Jetfire of 1962-63. |
|
|
I thought a muscle car was supposed to be a smaller-sized car with a big engine, and little else. That is, only the stuff required to go fast. Like a Road Runner with dog dish caps, vinyl bench, etc. Actually, the Shelby Charger probably fit the profile pretty well, if you have a broad enough mind to be flexible about engine and drivetrain layout. Small car stuffed with big power (relative), designed to go fast without too much unneccesary stuff on it, and there you go. |
|
|
would be essentially any-sized car, whether it be compact, mid-size, or full-size, but with a high performance engine and beefed up handling. Now sometimes they can make a smaller car fast by just dropping in the engine from a bigger car. For instance, the Olds 88s that used 98 V-8's, or the Buick Centurys which used Roadmaster V-8's. However, those particular V-8's aren't high-performance specialty engines. Just bigger engines in smaller bodies, and they went faster by virtue of having less weight to push. However the 1955 Chrysler C300 used a special, high-performance 331 Hemi that put out 300 hp. IIRC, the regular 331 Hemi in the New Yorker and Imperial only put out 250 hp. And I think the Windsor only had a 301 poly. Same with the DeSoto Adventurer and Plymouth Fury for '56. Now, some people will argue that you can't have a full-sized muscle car, but I don't agree with that. First off, a '64 GTO, which is a muscle car, rides a wheelbase the same length as a '56 Fury. 115 inches. Furthermore, I think a '64 GTO is about the same length! And something like a 1973 GTO is going to weigh nearly as much as a '57 Chrysler 300C or DeSoto Adventurer.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 17, 2005 1:09 pm)  least 350 cid)V8, intermediate-sized coupe or convertible body. If someone wants to consider a '96 Impala SS or a '64 426 Fury a Muscle car, I can understand that but it doesn't fit the orthodox definition. The were lots of perfectly good performance cars that don't quite fit the "accepted criteria: Some were based on compacts, not intermediates-- Chevy Nova SS/327/396, Studebaker Lark R3, Dodge Dart Swinger 318/383. Many were pony car-based: Camaro SS 427/396, Boss Mustang 429 A lot were based on full -sizers: Galaxie 406/427, Fury 383/426 Hemi. Is a '62 Biscayne 4dr with a b-post a "muscle car".? It is if you want it to be and it could outrun many of the classics. |
|
| Lots of good rides there! Things sure have changed. I suppose the SRT-8 300C would classify as a muscle car. Bigger but hipo powerplant with suspension and brake upgrades. Hopefully that 6.1 will find its way into the Charger, too. What's the going price on the SRT-8? 39-40K? Would change the horsepower performance wars bigtime. Especially at that price! You will have to double the cost to get the same from the Old World manufacturers. | |
|
|
| well one could argue that Chrysler and Dodge products are now part of the "Old World Manufacturers" | |
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
