First tank of 93...

[Sheepdog]

Badge says 350 and that’s what most came with.

That's what I'm getting at- there were three 350s available for the Camaro in 1969, and two of them were low-performance 2-barrel engines. It's always been popular to modify those cars into something they weren't. That's why there are more '69 "Z/28" Camaros today, than Chevrolet ever built.

Sponsored

 

[Sheepdog]

Come on guys bragging about how fast the Ranger is, is kinda dumb. My wife’s grocery getter CX-9 is just as fast. It’s fun but nothing to brag about. Also beating a superduty isn’t impressive at all.. “look at me I beat a 8000 pound truck” ?

Nobody's bragging about the Ranger being fast- I'm saying that the so-called "muscle" cars from the '60s are not as fast as most people "remember" them.

 

[AzScorpion]

Come on guys bragging about how fast the Ranger is, is kinda dumb. My wife’s grocery getter CX-9 is just as fast. It’s fun but nothing to brag about. Also beating a superduty isn’t impressive at all.. “look at me I beat a 8000 pound truck” ?

Well when the guy in the Super Duty was revving his engine like "look at how big my D!@% is" while looking down at me and I dusted him it was impressive.

 

[MTB-BRUH]

Nobody's bragging about the Ranger being fast- I'm saying that the so-called "muscle" cars from the '60s are not as fast as most people "remember" them.

Yes they are.. read again big dog

 

[MTB-BRUH]

Well when the guy in the Super Duty was revving his engine like "look at how big my D!@% is" while looking down at me and I dusted him it was impressive.

Haha I suppose, a simple tune would change that though lol

 

[AzScorpion]

Haha I suppose, a simple tune would change that though lol

Mine is tuned and even if his were no way he's getting me off the line with that 8000 lb tank. ?

 

[Sheepdog]

Yes they are.. read again big dog

Not sure what you're trying to say there...

 

[MTB-BRUH]

Mine is tuned and even if his were no way he's getting me off the line with that 8000 lb tank. ?

I could be wrong but I bet a tuned superduty would be quicker than a tuned Ranger even though they are a tank lol

 

[Sheepdog]

We still don't know which 350 HenryMac is claiming, so I found a Motor Trend test of a 4-barrel 396-powered SS/RS Camaro, which would be more powerful than any of the 350s that could have come in his car. It ran a 15.6 at 92mph.

 

[OFC Ranger]

I don't think a lot of non-Ranger owners realize how nimble this truck is, especially with a 93 tune. I'm not saying its smoking anything by any means, but its still a sleeper to an extent.

 

[JimG_AZ]

We still don't know which 350 HenryMac is claiming, so I found a Motor Trend test of a 4-barrel 396-powered SS/RS Camaro, which would be more powerful than any of the 350s that could have come in his car. It ran a 15.6 at 92mph.

Check out the YouTube channel “Cars and Zebras”. The channel shows all sorts of purse stock muscle car drag races. For the most part, I agree with you that the Ranger would either beat or hold its own against most of the old muscle cars that were stock. There are a few of the old muscle cars though, that posted very respectable numbers. I personally never owned a late 60’s/early 70’s muscle car, but I do have friends that did own them. First observation was that most of the old muscle cars had traction issues. Second, they were quite easy to work on and modify.

 

[MoldyTaco]

I have my dad’s old knock sensor. Basically, a cut down broom stick to check which cylinder had the problem. I have all of his old tools. He was a mechanic for 30+ years until he was forced to retire due to a heart condition. Eventually getting a heart transplant in 2000. Sadly we lost him in 2005 at 50 years old. Thankfully he taught me everything I know about cars.

 

[Dr. Zaius]

I could be wrong but I bet a tuned superduty would be quicker than a tuned Ranger even though they are a tank lol

I'm sure it will catch and pass a tuned Ranger, but in a short sprint I would still bet on the Ranger. The SuperDuty s a lot of mass to get moving.

My buddy had a tuned 6.7 PowerStroke 350 dually and it was pretty impressive.

Right now, my Ranger is stock and my Jeep has a FlashPaq tune on it. The Jeep will beat my Ranger off the line every time, even if I powerbrake the Ranger (V8 + AWD = zoom from a stop).

When the Ranger was tuned it would have been the same story, just the Ranger would have caught and passed the Jeep sooner.

 

[Sheepdog]

One of the things that propagates the myth of those old cars being fast, was the manufacturers quoting gross horsepower numbers instead of actual net horsepower. They would run them on a flywheel dyno, with no air cleaner, aftermarket headers (open), no fan belt, advanced ignition timing, rejetted carburetors, and so on.

And in some cases, they were simply lying.

That ended in 1972, when the government mandated that manufacturers quote the actual net horsepower.

One of the best examples of this, is the almighty LS6 "450 horsepower" 454. Super Chevy Magazine tested an LS6 Chevelle SS some years back, and it put out 288 horsepower to the rear tires.

In 1972, with manufacturers quoting actual net horsepower numbers for the first time, you could get your Chevelle with a 130 horsepower 2-barrel 307, a 165 horsepower 2-barrel 350, a 175 horsepower 4-barrel 350, a 240 horsepower 4-barrel "396" (402), or a 270 horsepower 4-barrel 454, the same horsepower as our Rangers...

 

[Trigganometry]

Well...there is my favorite....my dad worked at a Buick dealer back in the 60's - 70's and he would talk about the Wildcat 425 dual quad and the GS's....and as much as I love my Ranger I would never flex on a 455 GS Stage 1....unless I had a tune, nitrous, and a beefier diff lol

Long ago we got one of these given to us. With a little work we brought it back to life and it became known in our circle of the world as the “Death Star”

That car although a tank could get up to speed in no time at all. Just stopping it was another story! Hence the name! ?

Sponsored