Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
793 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Was haveing a discussion with another member here about muscle cars.
He said a Chevy Impala is not a muscle car cause they were avaliable with 4 doors and were big cars.
If thats true then Novas,Chevelles,Buick Skylarks,Olds Cutless and the first car the term Muscle Car was ever referred to the GTO/Lemans all were avaliable with 4 doors, so I guess there not Muscle Cars. :drunk:

So would you consider a Chevy Impala a muscle Car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,095 Posts
Waay too many "official" definitions in my book. I'd go with a mid/full size vehicle with a more powerful engine option. I think the Impala is "in", especially the SS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,340 Posts
I don't know about any official specifications, but in my opinion a muscle car was or is the sports car of the day. For instance the 67 Impala with the fast back rearend was a sporty looking vehicle.

One could say it all started with the Corvette and the T-bird. But Ford moved the T-bird into another class in 1958 and didn't come out with another sports car till the mustang. ( I could be wrong) and then in the 60's more car companies were trying to get into the act with their own version of a powerful sport coupe. Along came the Camaro, the Firebird, GTO and a few others that had more engine and looks than comforts. (Not to say that they weren't comfortable). I would say that the Impala is a muscle car but it is not one that I think of generally when I think about muscle cars. I think of Vettes, Firebirds, T-Birds,Mustangs, Camaros, Chevelles, Monte Carlos and GTO's. Thats not to say anything bad about Torinos, Tallegdalas (sp), Le Mans, Impalas, Fairlanes, Cougars,Olds Cutlass 442 and Iam sure I am forgetting a buch of others like the Nova, The GTX, The Cuda, Roadrunner, Buick GN, and others. I think of Muscle cars that are sporty and great to look at.
Richard
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
i think that the make up of a muscle car is V-8 2 door Rear wheel drive
you say that that would mean that those cars wouldnt be concidered muscle cars
well if its a four door Nova, Chevelle, Skylark, Cutlass
IT AINT A MUSCLE CAR it has to have 2 doors
the nova 4 door was a madger grandma car
thats my opinion
lolaz28
 

·
FnF: Fords n Ferraris
Joined
·
7,828 Posts
WLCollector said:
An American Made, rear wheel drive, V8 powered, hot rod
But then what about this car?




I consider a muscle car to be anything fast. Makes it easier than saying that is a muscle car, but that is a sports car, and all those are pony cars; and forget about that Skyline because it is an import.
 

·
FnF: Fords n Ferraris
Joined
·
7,828 Posts
computer guy said:
One could say it all started with the Corvette and the T-bird.
In the purest definition of muscle car it started with an Oldsmobile of all things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Corvettes are considered sports cars and not muscle cars. (seems like a little snobbery on the part of my brethren but hey.) I think definitions of true muscle cars come into play when cars reach the limit of 1hp per cubic inch (or very close there about) I think RWD if definitely a must (provides better burnouts!)

My personal definition is any car that is too heavy, doesn't really handle that well, has the aerodynamics of a brick, but moves like a scalded cat in a straight line leaving an ear to ear grin on the drivers face and on the face of anyone who see's it!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
350 Posts
I had a 65 Impala 396 four barrel. I never considered it a muscle car, but the 65 fastback mustang I own with only a 289 I consider a muscle car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
This can be debated forever. The 1st Muscle car was the 1964 GTO. A small 'cheap' sedan with a big motor.

Impala generally not considered a muscle car

then there's "Pony Cars" such as the Mustang, Camaros....

Impala a true Muscle car? NO

1969 a true Muscle Car? NO .... a Pony Car...

A GTO, Chevelle Muscle Car ... yes.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,696 Posts
This has been debated for years and years, with no single true answer. There were "Supercars", which became known later as "Musclecars"; there were "Junior Supercars" (go back and look at any late 60s Motor Trend, you'll see it), which later became known as "Musclecars"; there were "Ponycars", which later became known as "Musclecars".

A couple of traits hold true; it had to be two doors (I have never heard of a single four door Super/Junior Super/Pony/Muscle car. Ever), it had to have a high performance V8 (read: an engine that was not available in Mom's grocery getter), and of course, it had to be U.S. made and rear wheel drive (which, other than the Toro, was all we had back then).

Did Australia build some kick-ass cars? Hell yeah. But they weren't called Musclecars here, because we couldn't buy them here.

The first "muscle car" has been said to have been the Oldsmobile, the Buick Century, the Hudson Hornet, etc. etc. The first "true" Musclecar has been said to be the '64 GTO, and the "ilk" says it has to have been made between 1964 and 1974. Does that mean a '62 Impala 409, a '62 406 Tri-power Galaxie, or a '63 421 Pontiac wasn't? You tell me. Is a '67 Impala SS 427 not a Musclecar? You tell me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,361 Posts
2 door, RWD, 60s-early70s car, lots of HP, but with a good weight to HP ratio; although the Charger may blow that last criteria out.

And the "aerodynamics of a brick" works for me. :p
 

·
Slotcar Fanatic
Joined
·
13,013 Posts
Atencio said:
But then what about this car?




I consider a muscle car to be anything fast. Makes it easier than saying that is a muscle car, but that is a sports car, and all those are pony cars; and forget about that Skyline because it is an import.

Looks like an early 70's Torino mated with an early 70's Mustang Mach1. Too bad some of those Aussie cars weren't imported to the States back then. Different but still not too bad of a looker. rr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,810 Posts
The GTO may have kick started the muscle car movement but the chrysler 300 letter cars of the mid to late 50's were the first cars with muscle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,072 Posts
The term "musclecar" isn't a label, it's a concept. It's about taking what most people consider a normal transportation device (insert factory moniker here) and modifying it using a bigger engine to make it go faster. Cars with two doors weigh less than cars with four doors so using a four port body style would be defeating the purpose. In the fifties, "musclecars" were called "hot rods". In the late Fifties and early Sixties, the Big 3 started producing "factory hotrods". This term "hot rod" did not bode well with marketing strategists. The 1964 GTO was nothing more than a factory hot rod, renamed a musclecar by some marketing clown, who then notified the automotive press as to what it should be called. The rest is history..... :wave:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,552 Posts
I agree with most comments - 2 door, V-8, RWD. I consider a stripped down car a true muscle car - no a/c or power steering, no extra creature comforts. Full size or mid-pony car size, doesn't matter. Meant to go very fast in a straight line, not run road race courses.

My two cents, anyway.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top