[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by scott70

I like that video,,,nice car! Never get tired of watching pontiacs run like that,,I like the stockish look.

Thank you! I feel the same way. From your signature it looks like you are familiar with good running Pontiacs also!

[goatwgn]

Originally Posted by scott70

I like that video,,,nice car! Never get tired of watching pontiacs run like that,,I like the stockish look.

X2! Now that is a nice car. Well done!

[chiphead]

http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2016/11/...t-208-mph.html

[455TA]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

I have an 80 TA that looks stock and runs mid tens on motor and high nines on spray. I've tried very hard to get the fuel system to work without a sumped tank.... I'm finally giving up and plan on sumping the tank over the winter.

Paul K, whats the engine combo in that 80 TA? Interested, seeing that I have an 80 as well.

[70455HOVert]

For those that are daily driving classics...

I'm curious as to what your insurance coverage is. Feel free to PM me. I'd love to head this direction myself, but I don't see how it's feasible.

[6D9]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

I attached an "in car" video of my brother's 3710 lbs.1970 Firebird. He's done a lot of work to keep the car streetable but pretty fast. It has a quiet exhaust system, full interior with Recaro seats, killer sound system and drives it all over the place on 99 octane. He runs a 464 cid with E-heads. In street trim his car will run low tens on motor and low nines with a little bit of spray.


https://youtu.be/3LJ-0iRjMsI

PS....if you watch the video the speedometer normally works and is accurate.

Love that car! Any details on what done to the front suspension?? Thanks!

[goatwgn]

Originally Posted by chiphead

http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2016/11/...t-208-mph.html

I heard this yesterday. I am calling BS on this one unless it was lowered substantially. That car would become airborn at 208 MPH if you could get the drivetrain to push it that fast (which would be viable depending how much boost is run). I would not want to be in one of those things at anything approaching 200 mph. Cars need to sit very low and have a low roofline for that kind of speed to be controlled.

[HWYSTR455]

Kind of agree and kind of disagree about the airborne thing. I know I've gone 165 in the LeMans, a few times, and that thing is a brick. Had the T/A up to what one guy said was about 177, he was in a 'vette'. Granted, both are lowered, but the LeMans, not that low.

My whole point of building the last engine in the T/A was to break into the 200 club. I would have if I had kept going in that direction. Oddly though, and what most don't understand, is the faster you go, the amount of power needed multiplies.

Look at some of the cars that break 200 in the 1/4, I see many bricks out there doing it. And not low to the ground either.

It just takes more power once you go over 'X' with a particular body. Aerodynamics allow you to reduce that power to some degree.

Now if that guy actually went 208, that I kind of doubt, but I'm skeptical by nature. One reason I feel that way is because I've heard too many law enforcement officers say something along the lines of "Well it took me 120mph to catch him". And when the target was only going 80 mph.

.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by goatwgn

I heard this yesterday. I am calling BS on this one unless it was lowered substantially. That car would become airborn at 208 MPH if you could get the drivetrain to push it that fast (which would be viable depending how much boost is run). I would not want to be in one of those things at anything approaching 200 mph. Cars need to sit very low and have a low roofline for that kind of speed to be controlled.

Those things are already pretty dang low. You can't even squeeze a mouse fart under them.

New mustangs, Camaros, and especially the vettes are a pain in the butt to drive around here, they drag on everything.

Not to mention, these new body styles have a pretty low drag coefficient and a decent amount of downforce, they don't tend to "lift" like our classic cars do.

[goatwgn]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

Kind of agree and kind of disagree about the airborne thing. I know I've gone 165 in the LeMans, a few times, and that thing is a brick. Had the T/A up to what one guy said was about 177, he was in a 'vette'. Granted, both are lowered, but the LeMans, not that low.

My whole point of building the last engine in the T/A was to break into the 200 club. I would have if I had kept going in that direction. Oddly though, and what most don't understand, is the faster you go, the amount of power needed multiplies.

Look at some of the cars that break 200 in the 1/4, I see many bricks out there doing it. And not low to the ground either.

It just takes more power once you go over 'X' with a particular body. Aerodynamics allow you to reduce that power to some degree.

Now if that guy actually went 208, that I kind of doubt, but I'm skeptical by nature. One reason I feel that way is because I've heard too many law enforcement officers say something along the lines of "Well it took me 120mph to catch him". And when the target was only going 80 mph.

.

Don't know how fast I went in my '66, but the speedometer went around about straight down, even in the center of the odometer. Steering was light, and I backed down for obvious reasons. This was about 25 years ago, and I haven't tried to go that fast in that car since. I had had the 455 in there for a few years, and it was right before I took the 2.56 gears out and changed them to a more performance oriented gear. (I don't think Pontiac ever intended the Tempest wagon to go 140 lol.) If I lowered the car, and installed non factory style chin spoilers and air dams, I think it would have stayed more glued to the ground. It was stable as far as the ride and had no vibrations, just didn't like the light steering thing. And stuff comes up on you REAL quick at those speeds. Just watch that scene in the original "Blues Brothers" movie where they are driving almost 120mph under that train track in Chicago. LOL As you know, stuff really looks like that at those speeds. As much as I love the early "A" body, If I were to build an older Pontiac with the ultimate in high speed capability and handling, It would be the 1970 1/2-'81 Firebird Trans AM with a 535 Pontiac, 4L80E transmission, 3.08 rear, carbon fiber driveshaft, and all the latest trick suspension components attached to an aftermarket subframe.

[JSPONT]

Had my 70 Lemans (turbocharged) when I used to have a TKO 600 in it, at 167 mph in the beginning of 5th gear, I had more room to go, I just ran out of room.

[JLMounce]

Originally Posted by goatwgn

I heard this yesterday. I am calling BS on this one unless it was lowered substantially. That car would become airborn at 208 MPH if you could get the drivetrain to push it that fast (which would be viable depending how much boost is run). I would not want to be in one of those things at anything approaching 200 mph. Cars need to sit very low and have a low roofline for that kind of speed to be controlled.

There are several 200+ mph mustangs that run around in the half and full mile circuits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD16WTS6kmM

That's a basically stock bodied GT500. The KR hood probably isn't helping aerodynamics any.

point is, the Mustangs won't fly away. You can see in the video it's floaty, but even at 220 it's not flying away. I've had my previous stock 2011 Mustang GT at 140 indicated at PPIR heading down the banking into turn 1. At that speed in stock form the car is incredibly planted still.

My Firebird is gear limited to about 117 mph. At that speed it feels alright, but nowhere near as confidence inspiring as past Mustangs have been at speed.

[JLMounce]

I bled Ford blue for a long time. I've owned 8 Fords, 6 of which were late model mustangs. One was a mid 80's pickup and there was a turbocharged Focus in there at one point.

My Firebird has been with me through 7 of them and is still with me. Eat. Sleep. Pontiac.

[goatwgn]

Originally Posted by JLMounce

There are several 200+ mph mustangs that run around in the half and full mile circuits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD16WTS6kmM

That's a basically stock bodied GT500. The KR hood probably isn't helping aerodynamics any.

point is, the Mustangs won't fly away. You can see in the video it's floaty, but even at 220 it's not flying away. I've had my previous stock 2011 Mustang GT at 140 indicated at PPIR heading down the banking into turn 1. At that speed in stock form the car is incredibly planted still.

My Firebird is gear limited to about 117 mph. At that speed it feels alright, but nowhere near as confidence inspiring as past Mustangs have been at speed.

Would still feel better going that fast in something like a Corvette (and I am not a "Vette" fan either, but it is better for high speed driving), Ferrari, Bugatti, or even a Ford GT than anything like a Mustang or Camaro. They may do it but I would rather not be in it while it is doing it. Just my personal preference.

[JLMounce]

FWIW I would choose my 2011 GT mustang as a track car long before I chose my 2007 or 2013 C6.

The c6 coupe is a great car but it's not as competent near the limit as the c6 coupe. It's much more controllable and predictable, especially on factory rubber. The brakes on my 55b equipped mustang also put the base c6 brakes to shame.

My only caveat here is that I believe the c6 z06 would be superior. I never had mine on track, but I had been about 170 indicated on a back road. That car is baaaad. It should be for 80k though.

Make no mistake. Late model mustangs are very good cars to push to the limit.