DRAG TESTS 1960 - 1972
https://roadtests.tripod.com/
Highest peak torque, 1970 Caddilac 500. 525-lbs ft of torque. Not a Muscle engine car but the most torque.
And.........then there is the 430 cubic inch M.E.L. engine for '59 & '60 T-Birds rated at 350 H.P. & 490 ft. lbs. torque, which seems would put it into the mix? :-\ And I say T-Bird as trying to play along with performance platforms, as the '59 T-Birds were 'very' competitive in the NASCAR Championship Races until Ford pulled out mid-year; so it could definitely be described as something more than just a "Personal Car". ;)
And then, there was even the "Super Marauder" 430 package with the three deuce set-up at 400 H.P. and something between 485 & 510 ft. lbs. of torque, depending on who's literature you might want to believe; but then this was officially a 1958 option (Mercury) so maybe it would be out of the parameters of the article? :-\
Scott.
And two of the most MUSCULAR of the Muscle cars dont even get an honorable mention. Isnt a 427 COBRA and and a 427 Fairlane a muscle car. Both would knockout many combatants on that list! >:(
And speaking of "fastest Muscle Cars", where in the '71 "J-Code" 429SCJ Mustang? ???
Oh that's right, none of the ("Chevy") magazines wanted to test that one from Ford! :o
And who would believe any of these "tests" by the magazines anyway! ::)
Scott.
^^ Back in the day, I think just about everyone believed the magazine reports. I remember when I was a teenage reader, whatever the mags printed was gospel. Those guys were my heroes.
Then, during my long career, I met all of those "big names" in the magazine business. What a letdown. Only a few lived up to the image I had of them. Brock Yates was one. He was a cool down-to-earth guy and had a million interesting stories. Michael Lamm (different guy than John Lamm) was another.
David E. Davis was not at all as I'd hoped. He was 99% pompous azzhole, replete with a cape and walking stick. Mr Peanut with a steering wheel. (My opinion.)
The hot rod type magazine writers seemed to be the most "normal" of the bunch. They didn't get a lot of travel perks like the big mag staffers did. (The big mag writers got first class trips to Europe to drive the new Porsches. The hot rod mag staffers took coach trips to the midwest for car shows and drag races.)
There were not a lot of giant egos at the hot rod mags either. And those guys knew their stuff. You can't bluff your way through an in-depth technical article, or give an excuse as to why the engine blew up on the dyno when it's the cover story of the next issue. You gotta go build a better engine and have it done by deadline. No excuses.
I'm glad to have had my intro to the mag biz on staff at Popular Hot Rodding and Car Craft. Then, when I worked my way up to run Motor Trend, I hired a few of those same writers. They could out-work most of the lazy-by-comparison big magazine staffers any day of the week. I'd bet it's much the same today.
Quote from: Side-Oilers on February 06, 2023, 10:16:27 PM
^^ Back in the day, I think just about everyone believed the magazine reports. I remember when I was a teenage reader, whatever the mags printed was gospel. Those guys were my heroes.
Then, during my long career, I met all of those "big names" in the magazine business. What a letdown. Only a few lived up to the image I had of them. Brock Yates was one. He was a cool down-to-earth guy and had a million interesting stories. Michael Lamm (different guy than John Lamm) was another.
David E. Davis was not at all as I'd hoped. He was 99% pompous azzhole, replete with a cape and walking stick. Mr Peanut with a steering wheel. (My opinion.)
The hot rod type magazine writers seemed to be the most "normal" of the bunch. They didn't get a lot of travel perks like the big mag staffers did. (The big mag writers got first class trips to Europe to drive the new Porsches. The hot rod mag staffers took coach trips to the midwest for car shows and drag races.)
There were not a lot of giant egos at the hot rod mags either. And those guys knew their stuff. You can't bluff your way through an in-depth technical article, or give an excuse as to why the engine blew up on the dyno when it's the cover story of the next issue. You gotta go build a better engine and have it done by deadline. No excuses.
I'm glad to have had my intro to the mag biz on staff at Popular Hot Rodding and Car Craft. Then, when I worked my way up to run Motor Trend, I hired a few of those same writers. They could out-work most of the lazy-by-comparison big magazine staffers any day of the week. I'd bet it's much the same today.
I can add some more to what Van said. When I was a kid, I did stuff for Car-Craft mag with Jeff Smith and Chuck Hanson. Great guys. I even painted Chuck's '70 Z/28 for the articles "How to build a street machine" series. I will never forget what Jeff said to me during some testing of the cars. "How come your article says the car ran 13s when it really did 15s?" was my question. "Editorial hype" was Jeff's answer. "We have to...its all about the advertisers". That's when I figured out that all the magazine tests, and engine builds was all BS. Same bs when I later filmed for Hot-Rod, and Motor Trend TV.
Quote from: Side-Oilers on February 06, 2023, 10:16:27 PM
^^ Back in the day, I think just about everyone believed the magazine reports. I remember when I was a teenage reader, whatever the mags printed was gospel.
Then, during my long career, I met all of those "big names" in the magazine business. What a letdown.
Yeah, well back in the eighties we got involved with several of the magazines for tech. articles, and got so fed-up with the unprofessionalism and lack of any concern for any really accurate conveyance of information; the final straw was an instance when the proof read was full of supposed quotes from us that were first, not made by us, and then were technically wrong in their context! Upon attempting to rectify this issue, it was stated by the magazine representative to us that: "Let me explain, we (magazine) are in the business of selling magazines, not educating the public, and we feel the way in which we have written the article will sell more magazines, even if it isn't technically accurate! :o
Our response: "Good luck, and please don't call again"! ;D
But, that was O.K. by them, as they just went and found someone else who wanted to be made famous; if only in the eyes of the naive patrons of the car magazines. ::)
And yes, in my presentation I am stereotyping the industry, and I'm sure there are exceptions to this scenario, but this was our experience, repeatedly! ;)
Scott.
Quote from: pbf777 on February 07, 2023, 11:53:17 AM
Quote from: Side-Oilers on February 06, 2023, 10:16:27 PM
^^ Back in the day, I think just about everyone believed the magazine reports. I remember when I was a teenage reader, whatever the mags printed was gospel.
Then, during my long career, I met all of those "big names" in the magazine business. What a letdown.
Yeah, well back in the eighties we got involved with several of the magazines for tech. articles, and got so fed-up with the unprofessionalism and lack of any concern for any really accurate conveyance of information; the final straw was an instance when the proof read was full of supposed quotes from us that were first, not made by us, and then were technically wrong in their context! Upon attempting to rectify this issue, it was stated by the magazine representative to us that: "Let me explain, we (magazine) are in the business of selling magazines, not educating the public, and we feel the way in which we have written the article will sell more magazines, even if it isn't technically accurate! :o
Our response: "Good luck, and please don't call again"! ;D
But, that was O.K. by them, as they just went and found someone else who wanted to be made famous; if only in the eyes of the naive patrons of the car magazines. ::)
And yes, in my presentation I am stereotyping the industry, and I'm sure there are exceptions to this scenario, but this was our experience, repeatedly! ;)
Scott.
so "the media" has not changed much.......
As with anything, there's competent people and incompetent people in the car mag biz. I always strived to be at the top of my field in knowledge, skill, ability and creativity.
I've personally track tested over 1000 vehicles. I NEVER fudged the numbers on any of them. And I have sent more than one test car back to the manufacturer with a note to "please send us another version that's closer to production spec."
I'm no angel, but I was always trying to do the best job for the readers. If not for the six million of them in Motor Trend's case (when I was there) you don't have a magazine at all.
Yes, advertising brings in the majority of the income. It was a rule of thumb that a magazine's circulation (newsstand and subscription) had to pay the bills. Advertising was the profit.
Take a look at any big womens' fashion magazine. With the typical 80/20% advertising/editorial pages, they're the ones really raking it in.
And, that helps to explain why "no-advertising" platforms like Consumer Reports are barely hanging on.
Van,
Hot-Rod magazine is rumored to be on the verge of going out as well. It should. With only LS featured articles, it might as well be renamed 'LS Rod'. And I agree with you, most magazines are for profit, as are television, movies, etc. Its all a fantasy. Hollywood, baby!
Although not a muscle car I think these later Shelby's should be mentioned as they would embarrass a few of the big block and double their displacement small blocks.
The Shelby have proved to be reliable even without the durability enhancements of the production Turbo II.
Performance was impressive, with just 6.5 s needed for 0–60 mph and 14.8 s for the quarter mile run. Top speed was 135 mph
Not bad for a four banger with air conditioning and I won't mention the pocket rockets handling ability.