if you're gonna spout facts, at least try and get them right. the Stude's used a McCulloch supercharger and it was a 2bbl. there were dual quad options, but not supercharged. the avanti had 4bbl supercharger, though.
also, this pre-dates the muscle car era by about 6~8 years, and these cars were running 16~18 second 1/4 mile times. so not exactly world beaters. they were also expensive, and a chevy 210 could do damn near the same for less cost.
you naming off all that **** and not including a 71 Buick GSX Stage 1, aka the boogey man, just goes to show your ignorance.
yeah, everybody made fast ****. but pound for pound, mopar was king. and any wasteoid with their 305 chevelle talking about their cousin's friends dad's big block car didn't know their *** from a hole in the ground and the oakley blade mullet 5.0 crowd didn't know power unless it came in the form of a aftermarket add on. everybody that was there, at the time, knew mopar was king ****.
anybody that says otherwise is re-litigating history by bringing up silly special production cars that were either priced well out of reach of the general "street racer" population, or were dedicated race cars that never saw action on the street.
go talk that nonsense over at your 5.0 forum or chevelle forum, we're all full
if you're gonna spout facts, at least try and get them right. the Stude's used a McCulloch supercharger and it was a 2bbl. there were dual quad options, but not supercharged. the avanti had 4bbl supercharger, though.
also, this pre-dates the muscle car era by about 6~8 years, and these cars were running 16~18 second 1/4 mile times. so not exactly world beaters. they were also expensive, and a chevy 210 could do damn near the same for less cost.
you naming off all that **** and not including a 71 Buick GSX Stage 1, aka the boogey man, just goes to show your ignorance.
yeah, everybody made fast ****. but pound for pound, mopar was king. and any wasteoid with their 305 chevelle talking about their cousin's friends dad's big block car didn't know their *** from a hole in the ground and the oakley blade mullet 5.0 crowd didn't know power unless it came in the form of a aftermarket add on. everybody that was there, at the time, knew mopar was king ****.
anybody that says otherwise is re-litigating history by bringing up silly special production cars that were either priced well out of reach of the general "street racer" population, or were dedicated race cars that never saw action on the street.
go talk that nonsense over at your 5.0 forum or chevelle forum, we're all full up here.
The Studebaker avanti was the king in 1963. The 5.0 mustangs were the hot ticket in the 80's.And I don't understand why people don't want to give credit to were credit is do.if you're gonna spout facts, at least try and get them right. the Stude's used a McCulloch supercharger and it was a 2bbl. there were dual quad options, but not supercharged. the avanti had 4bbl supercharger, though.
also, this pre-dates the muscle car era by about 6~8 years, and these cars were running 16~18 second 1/4 mile times. so not exactly world beaters. they were also expensive, and a chevy 210 could do damn near the same for less cost.
you naming off all that **** and not including a 71 Buick GSX Stage 1, aka the boogey man, just goes to show your ignorance.
yeah, everybody made fast ****. but pound for pound, mopar was king. and any wasteoid with their 305 chevelle talking about their cousin's friends dad's big block car didn't know their *** from a hole in the ground and the oakley blade mullet 5.0 crowd didn't know power unless it came in the form of a aftermarket add on. everybody that was there, at the time, knew mopar was king ****.
anybody that says otherwise is re-litigating history by bringing up silly special production cars that were either priced well out of reach of the general "street racer" population, or were dedicated race cars that never saw action on the street.
go talk that nonsense over at your 5.0 forum or chevelle forum, we're all full up here.