With the new 5.0's putting down 400wheel,

[Vertnut]

Didn't the leaded fuel back then allow for more HP? Or maybe it was just they had higher octane?

Both. When I started driving (mid-'70's) you could get leaded regular/leaded premium/ unleaded. Premium was commonly 98 octane (sometimes 100 or 102 if you could find it). In '75, the gas fill tubes on cars were a lot smaller, and the leaded pump handle wouldn't fit in them. Of course we aleviated that problem rather quickly with tin snips...really.

[Ratt]

My stock Mazda 4-banger turbo puts down more than all of those minus maybe the GT500KR O.o

[Baron Von Crowder]

I lived it and owned many "muscle cars" from the '60's/'70's, and I've always said this new stuff (beginning in the late '80's) would kill any of those in every form or fashion. Ever see how many G's a '67/'68 GT500 will pull on a skid-pad? How about braking? Trust me...they were/are horrendous. Many of those SS396's and 454's couldn't break into the 14's.

I assume that when they were newer and working somewhat properly, they were tolerable, but I drove mine TWICE before deeming it unsafe and put it on jackstands.

[stang2be]

Agreed. I just sold my 95 Silverado that had the 210hp 5.7 TBI. New rig in sig. The 5.0 is tuned down a bit in the F150 but it still has plenty of power to get it moving.

[yellowstang]

My big block 67 Fastback would have gotten its ass handed to it by my 2013 GT. It sure was fun to drive with 411s and a 1/2 race cam though!

Fixed that for ya man.

[Crownline79]

Didn't the leaded fuel back then allow for more HP? Or maybe it was just they had higher octane?

[Vertnut]

My big block 67 Fastback would have gotten its ass handed to it by my 2013 GT. It sure was fun to drive with 411s and a .572 lift cam though!

And the "cool factor" made up a lot, too! Those old cars can still draw big crowds.

[Vertnut]

My stock 3.7 Mustang laid down 269 at the rear wheels. That explains why I walked away from a stock '67 with a 390.

Nice kill, but most 390's were boat anchors.

[Vertnut]

I lived it and owned many "muscle cars" from the '60's/'70's, and I've always said this new stuff (beginning in the late '80's) would kill any of those in every form or fashion. Ever see how many G's a '67/'68 GT500 will pull on a skid-pad? How about braking? Trust me...they were/are horrendous. Many of those SS396's and 454's couldn't break into the 14's.

[Baron Von Crowder]

The '66 289 2v's peak (113 rwhp) was at 3200 RPM.

[FATHERFORD]

boss 429 is the big surprise to me. I know it says dieing fuel pump, but that makes no sense.

[white trash wagon]

My stock 3.7 Mustang laid down 269 at the rear wheels. That explains why I walked away from a stock '67 with a 390.

[Rick Modena]

No shit. My 01 with a blower put down the same as my 13 would if I dyno'd it.

That aint no shit. My Cobra with a KB on my stock motor put out right at 400 to the wheels and my '12 5.0 is just a little below that N/A.

I also raced a CL63 AMG 6.3 a couple of weeks ago and I got out in front and he had to reel me in. And by reeling me in he was slowly getting me and passed me at about 100mph. I'm sure he was like, WTF?

My big block 67 Fastback would have gotten its ass handed to it by my 2013 GT. It sure was fun to drive with 411s and a .572 lift cam though!

[yellowstang]

No shit. My 01 with a blower put down the same as my 13 would if I dyno'd it.