Yup

I was talking to someone yesterday about cars and told him I owned a AE coupe (no mods 2.73 axle). When I told him it had a 350 hp motor he said his 1975 TA had more power than that and was faster. I didn't say much. Does anyone know if this is true? Wasn't this an era of hp robbing pollution controls?

sanchez

Those cars were super heavy. Unless he has done some really serious work you should blow his doors off. Also the Corvette turns and stop. A '75 Firebird most certianly does not. Just my .02.

Sam

90 droptop

I have a 1970 RAIII T/A and my 2.73 99 vert will cleans it's clock. No problem if he is stock. If he has moderate mods you should still be able to walk him. :cheers:

5 Liter Eater

I think some of the '75's came with 455's, but it was a smog motor, not producing as much power as you'd think.

Should not be an issue, especially if it's a small block.


[Modified by 5 Liter Eater, 1:06 PM 5/22/2003]

leadfoot4

I had a 1977 T/A, bought it brand new in the fall of 1976, and kept it until June of 2001, when I traded it for my 2001 C-5 coupe.

In all honesty, it's like comparing apples and oranges. I had done a few "bolt on" mods to my engine (a Pontiac 400), and quite a few handling mods, and these helped the performance of the T/A immensely. Your friends' car may or may not be a 455, and he may or may not have tweaked the suspension, to improve it's performance. Still, even with the mods, my C-5 will run rings around the T/A

Secondly, you're comparing a car that was designed as a mid-priced, boulevard performance car in the late sixties, to an upper end, high tech hot rod of the nineties. There's just no comparison, as technology and design made big gains in that 20 year period. I'm not slamming the T/A, as I still have a soft spot in my heart for them, but there's just no comparison.

If I could have kept my T/A, I would have, it WAS a fun car, but I didn't have the money to buy the 'Vette without selling the T/A. I also would have been facing a serious space problem with another car in my "fleet" so I had to part with it.

Also, tell your friend that his Pontiac engine was rated between 180-200 net hp. That's 150-170 LESS than today's LS-1. Plus, the T/A weighs around 3650 lbs. on the street (mine did, w/o AC). Yes, the 455 Pontiacs were torque monsters, (if he has one) but they still couldn't offset the hp difference ...Sorry


[Modified by leadfoot4, 2:24 PM 5/22/2003]

Yup

Thanks for all the replies. Also, I was reading an article on Vette's and it said in 1972 horsepower numbers dropped as part of a industrywide changeover from gross to net (as installed) power ratings. So what is the gross hp rating of the LS-1? How does it compare with the big blocks of the pre-1972 era?

leadfoot4

Strictly going by my observations, based on engines that were available in 1971(gross) as well as 1972(net), I would say that 70-90 hp was about the norm.

For example, I had a 1971 Chevelle SS454 that was rated at 365 hp. That engine carried over to 1972, and it dropped to 270 hp. Other engines might show more or less of a change, however due to smog regulations, cams and heads might have also changed as well, between 1971 and 1972. As I mentioned, to the best of my knowledge, the engine in my Chevelle was a direct, and intact carry-over.

marco383

Pontiac did have a sleeper motor for the Trans Am in the mid 70s called the SD 455. My fading memory recalls high 13 second quarters, so it might run with a stock, auto C5.

Crushinator

You'll smoke him. :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

Fastguy

I had a 75 Trans Am with a 400/TH400. It ran blistering 15.9's@90mph. Woo Hoo, hold on to your hat! BTW, they are rated at something like 200 net.

MC TORCH RED

the t/a is a high 14 second to low 15 second car..........no match for any c-5 auto or 6sp. i have had both.

AFVETTE

I bought a new 1975 T/A with the auto. I still have the window sticker, with options and destination the car stickered at $5346.00. My payments after down payment were $136 a month for 36 months. The 400 CID engine was rated at 180 HP. The shaker hood could easily be made functional by removing four small pop rivets holding a plastic cover in place. I installed some small gage screen painted black with some small self tapping screws that bit right into the area the pop rivets were. I then bought some white RAM AIR decals from a 1969 GTO. Looked sweet. But the car was a dog. I never beat my buddies Dodge Cuda with the 340 and 4 speed from a stop, but from a roll it was even.

Tom
USAF Retired

TLewis4095

The only near year that would of come close was the 73 SD455. I had one w/auto trans and it was high 13's stock!! :eek: Very fast for the old days. :cheers:

Mikeceli

Two cars I always wanted, TransAm and Corvette. I have a 1979 TA "Y84" Bandit 403 Olds/AT(180hp,torquey smog motor) and an 01 C5 Coupe. I bought the TA about 2 1/2 years ago and the Corvette last October. I havent driven the TA much since. I will keep the TA as it is appreciating in value, and when I find a Pontiac 455, Ill build it right and drop it in. The 01 Vette runs circles around the TA. Faster, handles WAY better, better ergonomics, ac,stero,quiet,fit and finish,etc. I too still have a soft spot for TA's though(especially "Bandit" versions). In the late 70's the TA was faster and outhandled the Vette. Car and Driver did a comparison and the race car drivers had better track times(road course) in the Vette. The regular enthuist drivers had better times in the TA, with WS6 handling package(it was more nuetral). When they filmed "Smoky and the Bandit" Bert Reynolds test drove Corvette and TA(maybe others) and chose the TA for the movie. He was given a TA to drive to/from the set(part of the deal). Mike C. :flag

WildKarrde

A lot of people have fond memories of the older muscle cars, but those memories often include performace that far exceeds what the car was ever capable of. I still hear many people talk about the glory days of performance back in the 60s, but if you looks at what cars are capable of there is no doubt that we are in the midst of the greatest performance revolution ever. These are the glory days of high performance cars.

:party:

leadfoot4

:iagree: Without a doubt!! In my opinion, because the 1980s were so bad, in terms of "ready-made" performance, we tend to fondly remember the late 60s-early 70s. However, when Detroit finally figured out the computer, and how to use it to generate horsepower, the new day dawned. Thank God!!

TLewis4095

:iagree:

I remember quite clearly....if we had a car that ran 14's or 13's......we had a killer quick car most could not touch!!! (I'm talking street cars.) Most were 14-15 seconds. :cheers:

MarginalTraction

The C5 is a 170+ mph car. The Trans Am is slower.

leadfoot4

Mike, we might be thinking of the same article, however the now defunct magazine "Car Life" did a three car comparison back in 1978. They had a Z-28 Camaro, a WS6 Trans Am, and an L-82 Corvette. I also seem to recall that the track testing was done at Willow Springs Raceway, the results were as you described them. I still have that magazine stashed away somewhere in the attic! :yesnod:

Untouchable00

They actually have an excerpt on the back page of Motor Trend about an article they wrote in 73' mentioning how the fastest cars that year were very weak, "performance was a politically incorrect dirty word" to quote the article.

They said the 73' 455-cube Super-Duty Firebird had a 3-speed automatic and a top speed of 124.30 mph...and it was the fastest out of the entire group which included the Charger, 454-Laguna, Mustang Mach1, Buick GS455 and Javelin AMX. This was in 73' and things only got worse from there.

Please race him...