[Pheboasmabs]

WUT! how is that american musle an olds 455 V8 bb or dodge 318 sb or chev 454 bb is american muslce not a 3 liter v6

1) its mad small
2) 3.0 lol how is that muscle? how bout 455 cubic inches = 7.8 liters and stroke it out to a 493 and 8.0


sound comes from the power (displacement of air) now giving urself a bigger exhaust to make ur engine sound bigger then it is is going to decrease backpressure. which could cause ur valves to float. it should be single exhaust pipe off the headers. ur best bet (if ur just doin the top end) is to lighten it up and use better durations on the cam then the stock one. or get a straigt 6

[StevenS]

You calm down lol, we are talking a 3.0L DOHC v6, not a 6L pushrod v8 from hell haha.

The duratec's are pretty nice engines, very wide powerbands, very reliable, and they breathe well.

I own a Cougar with the duratec, and I can tell you that a lot of times besides the straight 3L swaps. They opt fro high compression "hybrids". Whats that mean you say? Well you grab a 3L and add SVT Cams + Manifolds/heads from the Duratec SVT engine. You get all the fun of the 3L...with the top end power from the SVT. Now a straight 3L + Turbo will net you more power...but its more expensive...and depending on the platform...you better have LSD and upgraded axles. I know the cougars chassis wheel hops like a mother ****er if you get anywhere near 300hp without doing those things. Besides all that, the duratec responds to bolt on's well. I/H/E...headers esp.

The duratec is one of the sweetest sounding v6's I have ever heard. I put a CAI, Straight 2.5" Dual pipes, SVT TB, Headers/Y-Pipe, and a SVT UIM/LIM on my Cougar...and it effing roars! for a v6, even with the resonator in. It sounds really awesome at idel, almost like a 8...but when the secondaries open at 4000...it just screams. I love it! I'm prob. pushing 220hp right now with my setup...good for 14's. This is with the 2.5L setup. Plenty on the street for me...

Hope that helped

Thanks for that [thumbup]

You don't need 300+ hp on a front wheeled drive car... It ruins the handling

It will have an ATB so it doesnt matter how much power it has it will still handle on rails.

WUT! how is that american musle an olds 455 V8 bb or dodge 318 sb or chev 454 bb is american muslce not a 3 liter v6

1) its mad small
2) 3.0 lol how is that muscle? how bout 455 cubic inches = 7.8 liters and stroke it out to a 493 and 8.0

sound comes from the power (displacement of air) now giving urself a bigger exhaust to make ur engine sound bigger then it is is going to decrease backpressure. which could cause ur valves to float. it should be single exhaust pipe off the headers. ur best bet (if ur just doin the top end) is to lighten it up and use better durations on the cam then the stock one. or get a straigt 6

Before you go shouting your mouth off like you are the king of all you purvey take a moment to read the thread. I didn't say it was American muscle, I simply named the title that to gain peoples attention.

[Seeseeskeva]

You don't need 300+ hp on a front wheeled drive car... It ruins the handling

That's the most absurd statement I recall seeing here in a while. I'd ask you to explain why you think that, but there's no point since it's a false statement. If you have too much power for any given situation, back off on the throttle so that there's less power being produced.

[acceraStoof]

Well, it was said, but I didn't want to say it before to be nice. But yeah, A 3.0L V6 hardly qualifies as american muscle. In fact, most cars today don't qualify as "american muscle"

The core definition is a full size car engine stuffed into a "compact" car. What was then compact, is no longer so compact compared to todays cars.

American muscle MUST be V8, American, and RWD to many purists. But the G-body Turbo Regals and GN/GNX's also get lumped in there because they are on the G-body platform even though they only have a 3.8L V6. Course that V6 came be made to produce 400+ with a boost controller, catback, and race gas.

But for most, its V8, RWD, American, and between the years 1964 and 1974.

[DP5Ups8o]

That's the most absurd statement I recall seeing here in a while. I'd ask you to explain why you think that, but there's no point since it's a false statement. If you have too much power for any given situation, back off on the throttle so that there's less power being produced.

Rear wheel drive has fallen out of favor in passenger cars since the 1980s[citation needed], due in part to higher manufacturing costs, and that front wheel drive is safer to drive[1], and that it performs better on slippery roads.[2][3] However, some automobile brands, including Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Porsche continue to use rear wheel drive platforms. Rear wheel drive (or all-wheel drive) is still the preferred choice for high performance automobiles, due to the fact that very powerful front wheel drive cars tend to understeer.[4] The general limit of controllable power for a front wheel drive car is generally placed between 230 and 300 horsepower. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear-wheel_drive

[acceraStoof]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear-wheel_drive

Wiki makes some valid points. A good FWD system will not be able to put the power down nearly as well as a RWD car. As for wet/snowy driving? Front wheel drive isn't safer by itself. Merely the fact that when you overcome traction on a FWD vehicle it understeers.

Personally, I'd rather have rear in just about every situation, or AWD. Front wheel drive is for performance wannabes, and imposters. FWD simply asks the front wheels to do too much. Brake, accelerate, and corner.

Where in rear wheel drive car the front wheels need only brake and corner.

[Seeseeskeva]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear-wheel_drive

You stated that front-wheel drive "ruins handling". Your Wiki quote does not substantiate your statement.

Try again?

Edit: Fruity made some good points in his above post, but he's smart enough not to make the statement you did, because it would be false.

[acceraStoof]

You stated that front-wheel drive "ruins handling". Your Wiki quote does not substantiate your statement.

Try again?

Edit: Fruity made some good points in his above post, but he's smart enough not to make the statement you did, because it would be false.

Its still fun to toss my FWD daily driver around on a course, but in the end I'd rather have the ability to control the cars yaw with the throttle.

Another reason I don't like FWD? Under hard acceleration weight transfers to the rear, away from where the power is being put down. In a RWD car the weight goes exactly where we want it, on the driven wheels. I won't deny that FWD is more forgiving of mistakes due to its bias towards understeer, but that truly annoys me in a car I'm trying to drive hard.

The fact is if you look at racing in unlimited classes you will not see a FWD car. Its RWD or AWD. AWD provides more control at the expense of driveline friction, and weight, while RWD provides light weight, and the ability to put the power down on pavement. However a loose surface unsettles a RWD car easier than AWD.

Could you imagine a FWD bike if they could make one? There is a prototype 2wd bike out there using hubless wheels, but I don't think the technology has become cheap enough yet.

__________________________________________________ ___

However, most cars are FWD simply for cost reasons. FWD maximizes passenger room as well because the floor does not have a drive shaft hump in the middle of the floor. Its a simpler design, no drive shafts, no axles to deal with.... However if you take that to heart, then a rear or mid engine with a transaxle is better. Oh wait. Ferarri, Porsche, etc...

[DP5Ups8o]

You stated that front-wheel drive "ruins handling". Your Wiki quote does not substantiate your statement.

Try again?

Edit: Fruity made some good points in his above post, but he's smart enough not to make the statement you did, because it would be false.

I beg your pardon?... go re-read my post, I said what needed to be said.

300+ horsepower is worthless in a front wheel drive car because it ruins the handling. You have yet to prove me wrong.

[StevenS]

RWD > AWD > FWD

That said, a FWD setup correctly with an ATB or LSD can smash an equally well setup RWD car!

[acceraStoof]

I beg your pardon?... go re-read my post, I said what needed to be said.

300+ horsepower is worthless in a front wheel drive car because it ruins the handling. You have yet to prove me wrong.

You have yet to prove yours. Or perhaps your foot is too heavy.

[DP5Ups8o]

well I could start ranting about torque steer and understeer and the dangers of both in an overpower front wheel drive car but really... I honestly thought such information was common knowledge.

Take the ford focus ST for example with around 220hp, the last generation suffered horrible torque steer to the point of making the car unsafe.

Especially on any roads with an uneven surface,

[snislarne]

But for most, its V8, RWD, American, and between the years 1964 and 1974.

I don't agree with those years at all. That is when we saw more of them, but they are still been around ever since.

The Camaro and Mustang mostly though and the new SRT8.

To many imposters and ricer type cars since then though. Impala SS, Monte Carlo SS, GTO, SRT4, SHO, Cobalt SS, ect. ect.

[Mboxmaja]

Erm... the GTO is a muscle car...

[snislarne]

Erm... the GTO is a muscle car...

That can go both ways. The thing is though, the GTO is Australia. Made in Australia and imported to America.

The sad thing too, is the Camaro is going to go the same route. Designed in Australia, built there and is going to be shipped here. Same thing for the new GTO which will be made in the same plants as the Camaro.

I think that it is a muscle car, but not a true muscle car. Plus it only started looking aggressive and muscleish when they added the scoops on the LS2 models.




I think that there could be some V6 muscle capable motors. It was only used in trucks (S-10/Blazer/S-15), but the 4.3L motor. Another thing about American muscle motors is that they are extremely customizable and can make sum serious power with just a few simple part swaps and can handle a bunch of psi stock. And this 4.3L does just that. Just was never used in a car application, but if it was I think that this motor could qualify for American Muscle.

[acceraStoof]

Actually, the Mustang, Camaro, and Firebird aren't considered muscle cars. They are considered pony cars. But often get grouped with the Muscle cars because they were popular from the same era.

The GTO is a Muscle Car, the 04 and 05 GTO's fall into the same catagory as well.

Buick GS/GSX, GTO, Chevelle, Fairlane, Charger, Challenger, Superbird, etc..those are muscle cars.

That is what the purists say. Personally I don't really care. As long as its RWD, looks "muscle", and makes a boat load of torque (Buick Grand Nationa 3.8L Turbo v6) then I don't really care.

[lopezsokero]

Take the ford focus ST for example with around 220hp, the last generation suffered horrible torque steer to the point of making the car unsafe.

Especially on any roads with an uneven surface,

Haha... umm... what? The last gen had 170 hp and handled ****ing brilliant. The current gen has 225 hp and a shitload of torgue but the tiny amount of torquestreer it has is lightyears away from "unsafe"...

[encumeterz]

That can go both ways. The thing is though, the GTO is Australia. Made in Australia and imported to America.

The sad thing too, is the Camaro is going to go the same route. Designed in Australia, built there and is going to be shipped here. Same thing for the new GTO which will be made in the same plants as the Camaro.

I think that it is a muscle car, but not a true muscle car. Plus it only started looking aggressive and muscleish when they added the scoops on the LS2 models.




I think that there could be some V6 muscle capable motors. It was only used in trucks (S-10/Blazer/S-15), but the 4.3L motor. Another thing about American muscle motors is that they are extremely customizable and can make sum serious power with just a few simple part swaps and can handle a bunch of psi stock. And this 4.3L does just that. Just was never used in a car application, but if it was I think that this motor could qualify for American Muscle.

Sadly, some of the US market requirements screwed up the Monaro/GTO - for example the fuel tank position severely reduced the boot space and as for the styling "improvments", where's my barf bag[cursing]

The reason the GTO and now the Camaro were built on Australian designed platforms is because they are simply the best engineers, period! Pity about the US styling on the Camaro, though.

You should bear in mind that the engine is still US iron (or aluminum, rather).
Heck, if it wasn't for all the "it's not American' BS, people would still be wetting themselves over them - esp' if they got the 410hp versions.
I guess that y'all won't buy the new car (Pontiac G8?) based on the new Holden even if it's offered with the 420+hp engine - 5 seconds to 60 and around 170mph top end.
have a lookie here to see what may be on offer.
http://www.hsv.com.au/index_eseries.asp

[encumeterz]

WUT! how is that american musle an olds 455 V8 bb or dodge 318 sb or chev 454 bb is american muslce not a 3 liter v6

1) its mad small
2) 3.0 lol how is that muscle? how bout 455 cubic inches = 7.8 liters and stroke it out to a 493 and 8.0


sound comes from the power (displacement of air) now giving urself a bigger exhaust to make ur engine sound bigger then it is is going to decrease backpressure. which could cause ur valves to float. it should be single exhaust pipe off the headers. ur best bet (if ur just doin the top end) is to lighten it up and use better durations on the cam then the stock one. or get a straigt 6

Oh dear, talk about a little knowledge ...
Stop living in the past, people have to work with what they've got and I don't think he'll be sticking a Tornado in the front of that thing - that is the combo' you mean, isn't it - 455CID and front wheel drive?

To the OP, have you checked out options for increasing displacement, otherwise it'll come down to breathing for torque and rpm for power.

[Mmzmptvk]

Haha... umm... what? The last gen had 170 hp and handled ****ing brilliant. The current gen has 225 hp and a shitload of torgue but the tiny amount of torquestreer it has is lightyears away from "unsafe"...

perhaps he is thinking of the Focus RS which was around 200+BHP was it not? i think that handled quite badly... got beaten by an ST220 estate on a wet track