258 replies to this topic

[yel327]

If the A9X is not a muscle car then Brocky wasted his time winning by 6 laps ffs

 

That wasn't an A9X Gene. Just like the 1984 VK that won Bathurst wasn't a road going Commodore. Nothing that won Bathurst past 1968 was a standard road car. What i'm getting at it the way the cars performed at Bathurst after 1968 really have no relevance to the road going version's status.

[N/A-PWR]

I had a thought today about the Muscle Cars in Australia,

 

which would be the 350/454 Chev in the Registered LC/LJ Torana.

 

 

The regulation regarding the biggest motor put in that model,

 

or the weight factor, restricts has from doing this now.    

[Potta]

Its all irrelevant because the definition of what describes a "Muscle car' was invented after the fact to describe what people (Americans) generally mean when they use the term.

 

The idea of an Australian Muscle Car was not even considered.

 

In my opinion it is any car from the 60's and 70's that is small with a big motor.

 

By WOT's definition, Torana's are not muscle cars, but an American's definition of a fanny is far different to an Australian's.

 

I rest my case.

 

Bomber, stop being a fanny, you can take the Aussie definition or the American one, they both work lol.

[unclefestal34s]

A lot off different definitions and varying opinions on what are classed as muscle car's in america and australia,..my 1968 factory plymouth gtx 426 hemi twin barrel carter carbs 4 speed dana 60 rear end is not classed as a muscle car but the same bodied car in road runner form A12 440 six pack is classed as a muscle car work that out...the mighty 426 engine which was banned from nascar racing for being to fast back in 1970 clocked at 208 mph..

i have never classed any of our australian car's as muscle car's and nor do i see them that way,yes they are special high performance car's ..our early monaro's were australian clones for the camaro's which no were no different to the mustang pony car's..our six cylinder torana's and six pack chargers were giant killers on the circuit ..our v8 torana's were first of the real big bangers racing against gt falcons that were disguised as shelby mustangs with the bullet proof drivelines..i don't even classed any off my L34's as muscle car's.even my my high out put car...

The factory american muscle car's all had big engine's and equally strong drivelines from the factory,..all our australian car's bar the GT Falcons had piss weak drivlines,..had the hk ht monaro's been fitted with 12 bolt diff's and muncie gearbox's instead of the piss weak saginaws and 10 bolt diff's then i may have changed my view..it may been and optioned for the diff but really..

Our australian car's from the late 60's and 70's would have had the arses spanked by the american car's in touring car form just go and watch some of the trans-am racing from that era and you will see..

Australia for it's size has built what i think are some of the best touring car's touring  i've seen but i still don't regard them as muscle car's,..most of our car's here that are being mentioned have been modified hot rodded what ever you want to call it to some degree..the only factory purpose built race car is the falcon gtho p3 400hp holley extractors but in american term dosen't qualify as its a 4 door car..the term muscle car has always been used loosely in my opinion...

anyway only my thoughts and opinion on this topic..

well done craig (wot179) for for picking a good topic for debate and discussion.. 

[Kirk]

If the A9X is not a muscle car then Brocky wasted his time winning by 6 laps ffs

 

 

Was the car that came second by 6 laps a shitbox?

[eyepeeler]

I don't really care what the literal meaning of Muscle Car is, and I say that because for me it's about interpretation and the feeling you get from driving any car.
Hop behind the wheel of a Commodre Equipe and you get from A to B. Hop behind the wheel of a HSV GTS and its more than just going from A to B, it getting there with a mega smile on your face. I know referencing new cars will earn me a barrage of comments but in terms of historic cars, it's the same.

To me, I love the L34 as the sensation and the rush it gives me is like no other Torana. It ticks the boxes, it's got noise, a race based engine, and tough look.
My SL hatch just doesn't fit that bill, I still love driving it but it's not the same love as the L34.

I would say that just because the description "Muscle Car" originated in the US, doesn't mean that other countries can't use that same wording to create their own basis for a muscle car.
I bet the bloke who first used those two immortal words together didn't think that the words would eventually be shoehorned into an Oxford Dictionary meaning.

Edited by eyepeeler, 18 December 2015 - 12:12 AM.

[xu2308]

Yanks can have Muscle Cars, our press said Super Cars in 1972 and the Top Speeds the V8 LJ and Phase 4 were capable of were matching the 1972 Lambo and 1972 Ferrari.

[yel327]

A lot off different definitions and varying opinions on what are classed as muscle car's in america and australia,..my 1968 factory plymouth gtx 426 hemi twin barrel carter carbs 4 speed dana 60 rear end is not classed as a muscle car but the same bodied car in road runner form A12 440 six pack is classed as a muscle car work that out...the mighty 426 engine which was banned from nascar racing for being to fast back in 1970 clocked at 208 mph..

i have never classed any of our australian car's as muscle car's and nor do i see them that way,yes they are special high performance car's ..our early monaro's were australian clones for the camaro's which no were no different to the mustang pony car's..our six cylinder torana's and six pack chargers were giant killers on the circuit ..our v8 torana's were first of the real big bangers racing against gt falcons that were disguised as shelby mustangs with the bullet proof drivelines..i don't even classed any off my L34's as muscle car's.even my my high out put car...

The factory american muscle car's all had big engine's and equally strong drivelines from the factory,..all our australian car's bar the GT Falcons had piss weak drivlines,..had the hk ht monaro's been fitted with 12 bolt diff's and muncie gearbox's instead of the piss weak saginaws and 10 bolt diff's then i may have changed my view..it may been and optioned for the diff but really..

Our australian car's from the late 60's and 70's would have had the arses spanked by the american car's in touring car form just go and watch some of the trans-am racing from that era and you will see..

Australia for it's size has built what i think are some of the best touring car's touring  i've seen but i still don't regard them as muscle car's,..most of our car's here that are being mentioned have been modified hot rodded what ever you want to call it to some degree..the only factory purpose built race car is the falcon gtho p3 400hp holley extractors but in american term dosen't qualify as its a 4 door car..the term muscle car has always been used loosely in my opinion...

anyway only my thoughts and opinion on this topic..

well done craig (wot179) for for picking a good topic for debate and discussion.. 

 

Pretty well said. All i'd say is the PhaseIII isn't the only purpose built race car made in Australia. All 3 x GT-HO's were purpose built race cars, as are the XU1's and for the modified GroupC rules so is the L34. The XA GT-HO and the V8 XU1 would have been too. GroupA cars were also factory racers. The primary reason for building all these cars was to race. The HK wasn't built with racing as the primary objective, the HT probably leaning more to racing although it is simply an evolution of the HK. I'm not 100% convinced if the XR and XT GT's were totally built to race. They were built because Ford were worried about what GMH were coming up with but not sure if Ford thought GMH were building a race car or if they wanted to beat GMH to the performance punch.