C7 General Discussion General C7 Corvette Discussion not covered in Tech
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

How the C7 Stacks Up Against 1970 Performance Cars

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-30-2015, 09:21 AM
  #1  
Ernest_T
Drifting
Thread Starter
 
Ernest_T's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2014
Location: Salado TX
Posts: 1,782
Received 106 Likes on 78 Posts
Default How the C7 Stacks Up Against 1970 Performance Cars

I found an interesting web site that has a list of cars and their quarter mile times from 1960-1972. The times come from contemporary road tests published in different car magazines. It's interesting to compare cars from the original golden age of high performance to today. We truly live in an amazing time when our C7 can blow these times out of the water and provide 30 mpg and creature comforts that weren't even dreamed of in the 1960s. The magazine's are listed in parenthesis.

Here's a list from 1970 and the link:

http://roadtests.tripod.com/

1970 AMC AMX (MT)
390ci/325hp, 4spd, 3.54, 0-60 - 6.5, 1/4 mile - 14.68 @ 92mph
1970 AMC AMX (PHR)
360ci/315hp, 4spd, 3.51, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.90 @ 94.63mph
1970 AMC Javelin SST (CL)
390ci/325hp, 3spd auto, 3.15, 0-60 - 7.6, 1/4 mile - 15.11 @ 91.5mph
1970 AMC Rebel Machine (HR)
390ci/340hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.49 @ 93mph
1970 Buick Skylark GS (HC)
455ci/360hp, 4spd, 3.64, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.72 @ 105.01mph
1970 Buick Skylark GS (MT)
455ci/360hp, 3spd auto, 3.64, 1/4 mile - 13.38 @ 105mph
1970 Buick Skylark GSX (CC)
445ci/360hp, 3spd auto, 3.64, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.28 @ 99.77mph
1970 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS454 (CL)
454ci/360hp, 3spd auto, 2.73, 0-60 - 7.7, 1/4 mile - 16.2 @ 90.1mph
1970 Chevelle SS396 (CL)
396ci/350hp, 3spd auto, 3.31, 0-60 - 8.1, 1/4 mile - 15.5 @ 90mph
1970 Chevelle SS454 (SSC)
450ci/450hp, 3spd auto, 3.31, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.55 @ 104mph
1970 Chevelle SS454 (CC)
454ci/450hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile 13.12 @ 107.01mph
1970 Chevelle SS454 (CD)
454ci/450hp, 3spd auto, 3.70, 0-60 - 5.4, 1/4 mile 13.81 @ 103.80mph
1970 Chevelle SS454 (HR)
454ci/450hp, 4spd, 4.11, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.44 @ 108.17mph
1970 Camaro Z/28 (MT)
350ci/370hp, 3spd, 3.73, 0-60 - 7.0, 1/4 mile - 15.4 @ 94mph
1970 Camaro Z/28 (CC)
350ci/370hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.11 @ 102.73mph
1970 Camaro Z/28 (HC)
350ci/360hp, 3spd auto, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.88 @ 101mph
1970 Nova SS (CC)
350ci/300hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.90 @ 94mph
1970 Nova SS (RT)
396ci/350hp, 4spd, 3.31, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 15.7 @ 98.02mph
1970 Corvette (CL)
350ci/370hp, 4spd, 4.11, 0-60 - 5.7, 1/4 mile - 14.17 @ 102.15mph
1970 Chrysler 300-Hurst (CL)
440ci/375hp, 3spd auto, 3.23, 0-60 - 7.1, 1/4 mile - 15.30 @ 94.93mph
1970 Dodge Dart (CC)
340ci/275hp, 3spd std, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.70 @ 96.84mph
1970 Dodge Charger R/T (CL)
440ci/375hp, 3spd auto, 3.55, 0-60 - 6.4, 1/4 mile - 14.71 @ 96.67mph
1970 Dodge Challenger R/T (PHR)
440ci/390hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.33 @ 99.88mph
1970 Dodge Challenger 340 (HC)
340ci/275hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.55 @ 97mph
1970 Dodge Challenger R/T (CC)
440ci/390hp, 3spd auto, 3.2.3, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.62 @ 104.28mph
1970 Dodge Challenger Convertible R/T (CL)
440ci/390hp, 4spd, 3.54, 0-60 - 7.1, 1/4 mile - 14.64 @ 97.82mph
1970 Dodge Challenger R/T (CD)
426ci/425hp, 3spd auto, 3.23, 0-60 - 5.8, 1/4 mile - 14. 10 @ 103.20mph
1970 Dodge Challenger SE (CC)
426ci/425hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - 6.3, 1/4 mile - 13. 10 @ 107.12mph
1970 Mustang Mach 1 (PHR)
428ci/335hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.03 @ 98.89mph
1970 Mustang Boss 302 (CL)
302ci/290hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - 6.5, 1/4 mile - 14.85 @ 96.10mph
1970 Mustang Mach 1 (MT)
351ci/300hp, 3spd, 3.00, 0-60 - 8.2, 1/4 mile - 16.0 @ 86.2mph
1970 Mustang Mach 1 (CC)
351ci/300hp, 4spd, 3.50, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 15.23 @ 94.33mph
1970 Mustang Boss 429 (SS)
429ci/375hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.64 @ 104.65mph
1970 Ford Torino GT (CL)
351ci/300hp, 4spd, 3.25, 0-60 - 8.1, 1/4 mile - 15.6 @ 89.5mph
1970 Ford Torino (MT)
429ci/370hp, 3spd auto, 3,50, 0-60 - 6.0, 1/4 mile - 14.5 @ 100.2mph
1970 Ford Torino (CC)
429ci/375hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.85 @ 104.06mph
1970 Ford Torino SCJ (SS)
429ci/370hp, auto, 3.91, 1/4 mile - 13.62@ 105.90mph
1970 Mercury Cyclone (MT)
429ci/370hp, 3spd auto, 3.50, 0-60 - 6.4, 1/4 mile - 14.5 @ 99mph
1970 Mercury Cougar Eliminator (CL)
302ci/290hp, 4spd, 4.30, 0-60 - 7.6, 1/4 mile - 15.8 @ 90mph
1970 Cutlass Rallye 350 (CL)
350ci/310hp, 4spd, 3.42, 0-60 - 7.0, 1/4 mile - 15.27 @ 94.33mph
1970 Cutlass W31 (PHR)
350ci/325hp, 3spd auto, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.62 @ 96.05mph
1970 Cutlass SX (MT)
455ci/365hp, 3spd auto, 3.08, 0-60 - 6.6, 1/4 mile - 14.80 @95mph
1970 Cutlass 442 (HC)
455ci/370hp, 3spd auto, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.89@ 103.22mph
1970 Plymouth Duster 340 (CC)
340ci/275hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile 14.22 @ 98mph
1970 Plymouth Duster 340 (CL)
340ci/275hp, 3spd auto, 3.23, 0-60 - 6.2, 1/4 mile - 14.72 @ 94.24mph
1970 Plymouth Cuda AAR (CL)
340ci/290hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.5 @ 99mph
1970 Plymouth Cuda 340 (RT)
340ci/275hp, 4spd, 3.91, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 15.36 @ 94mph
1970 Plymouth Cuda 340 (MT)
340ci/275hp, 3spd auto, 4.10, 0-60 - 6.4, 1/4 mile - 14.5 @ 96mph
1970 Plymouth Cuda 340 (CL)
340ci/275hp, 3spd auto, 3.55, 0-60 - 7.5, 1/4 mile - 15.0 @ 94mph
1970 Plymouth Cuda 440+6 (PHR)
440ci/390hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.97 @ 104mph
1970 Plymouth Hemi Cuda (CC)
426ci/425hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.10 @ 107mph
1970 Plymouth Hemi Cuda (CC)
426ci/425hp, 3spd auto, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.69 @ 105.63mph
1970 Plymouth Hemi Cuda Covertible (HPC)
426ci/425hp, 3spd auto, 4.10, 0-60 - 5.6, 1/4 mile - 13.45 @ 105mph
1970 Plymouth Road Runner (MT)
440ci/390hp, 4spd, 4.10, 0-60 - 6.6, 1/4 mile - 14.06 @ 101.69mph
1970 Plymouth Road Runner (SS)
426ci/425hp, 3spd auto, 4.10, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 13.34 @ 107.50mph
1970 Pontiac Grand Prix SJ (HPC)
455ci/370hp, 4spd, 3.31, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.19 @ 101.29mph
1970 GTO (HPC)
400ci/366hp, 4spd, 3.90, 0-60 - 6.6, 1/4 mile - 14.45 @ 100mph
1970 GTO (CC)
400ci/370hp, 4spd, 3.55, 0-60 - n/a, 1/4 mile - 14.02 @ 98.90mph
1970 GTO (CD)
455ci/360hp, 4spd, 3.31, 0-60 - 6.6, 1/4 mile - 15.00 @ 96.50mph
1970 GTO (CL)
455ci/360hp, 3spd auto, 3.55, 0-60 - 6.6, 1/4 mile - 14.76 @ 95.94mph
1970 Pontiac Firebird Formula 400 (CL)
400ci/330hp, 3spd auto, 3.07, 0-60 - 6.4, 1/4 mile - 14.86 @ 95.54mph
1970 Pontiac Trans Am (HR)
400ci/345hp, 4spd, 3.91, 1/4 mile - 13.90 @ 102mph
Old 06-30-2015, 09:32 AM
  #2  
Corgidog1
Le Mans Master
 
Corgidog1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,442
Received 2,523 Likes on 1,482 Posts

Default

In 1972 hp ratings were revised across all manufactureres to reflect a new way of calculating hp so the same engine in 1972 had around a 30% decrease in HP rating from 1971 ie 71 454 vette was rated at 365 hp while the 1972 identical 454 was rated at 270 hp.

Today's C7 will blow away any muscle cars from the 60s and 70s as will most of today's higher performance cars.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:25 AM
  #3  
marco383
Burning Brakes
 
marco383's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2002
Location: Jasper GA
Posts: 1,152
Received 25 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

More amazing is comparing the 0-60 and quarter mile times of many current V6 "family" sedans to muscle cars. A few of them would also embarrass the GTO crowd.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:28 AM
  #4  
BOBSZ06
Le Mans Master
 
BOBSZ06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: N. CA
Posts: 5,027
Received 319 Likes on 205 Posts

Default

1970 Chevelle SS396 (CL)
396ci/350hp, 3spd auto, 3.31, 0-60 - 8.1, 1/4 mile - 15.5 @ 90mph





Old 06-30-2015, 10:36 AM
  #5  
sanantguy
Burning Brakes
 
sanantguy's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2015
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Yeah maybe, but there is nothing quite like a naturally aspirated 454.

It's not always about the sheer numbers
Old 06-30-2015, 10:37 AM
  #6  
1KULC7
Le Mans Master

 
1KULC7's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 8,067
Received 313 Likes on 136 Posts

Default

It not about the HP its about the efficiency of hp to the ground. They measured HP differently back then, and obviously technology on suspension and drive train has made up the difference.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:41 AM
  #7  
juanvaldez
Team Owner
 
juanvaldez's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2014
Posts: 26,430
Received 493 Likes on 364 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Corgidog1
In 1972 hp ratings were revised across all manufactureres to reflect a new way of calculating hp so the same engine in 1972 had around a 30% decrease in HP rating from 1971 ie 71 454 vette was rated at 365 hp while the 1972 identical 454 was rated at 270 hp.

Today's C7 will blow away any muscle cars from the 60s and 70s as will most of today's higher performance cars.
My wife's Ford Focus ST will eat most of them.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:43 AM
  #8  
juanvaldez
Team Owner
 
juanvaldez's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2014
Posts: 26,430
Received 493 Likes on 364 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 1KULC7
It not about the HP its about the efficiency of hp to the ground. They measured HP differently back then, and obviously technology on suspension and drive train has made up the difference.
Old hp numbers were inflated because it was with accessories, no generator, fan, etc.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:46 AM
  #9  
Ernest_T
Drifting
Thread Starter
 
Ernest_T's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2014
Location: Salado TX
Posts: 1,782
Received 106 Likes on 78 Posts
Default

Doesn't matter what the HP numbers were, the times are what makes me cringe. We thought we were so fast back in the day.
Old 06-30-2015, 10:54 AM
  #10  
crawfish333
Melting Slicks
 
crawfish333's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Opelousas, Lousiana
Posts: 3,151
Received 292 Likes on 187 Posts
CI 6-7 & 9 Veteran

Default

Yes you are correct, but besides the lack of technology that our new cars have built in, we also had to deal with bias Ply nylon tires. There was no way you could get those things hot enough to get traction on a launch, but it did make for a nice show.

Last edited by crawfish333; 06-30-2015 at 03:39 PM.
Old 06-30-2015, 12:11 PM
  #11  
1KULC7
Le Mans Master

 
1KULC7's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 8,067
Received 313 Likes on 136 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by juanvaldez
Old hp numbers were inflated because it was with accessories, no generator, fan, etc.
Old 06-30-2015, 12:16 PM
  #12  
1KULC7
Le Mans Master

 
1KULC7's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 8,067
Received 313 Likes on 136 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Ernest_T
Doesn't matter what the HP numbers were, the times are what makes me cringe. We thought we were so fast back in the day.
If you put all the options and devices we have in our Corvettes into a 1970 Corvette, the weight of the 1970 would be so much more.
Now just image the weight of an Chevelle SS or a GS455...the weight would be even that much more.

Lighter metals, stronger alloys, better plastics etc, ALL have come lighter frames all of this has contributed to out performing the older cars. I use to own a Buick GS400, Yenko Camaro, 62 Fuelie Corvette, and the list goes on, including a 63 SWC, my cars today are the 2014 Corvette and the 2013 Camaro RS (V6), and I prefer these cars...been there on restoration and maintaining, restro rods are nice, but nothing like the new performance cars of today....

Today our Corvette Stingrays (C7) have more computers power then what it took on the Apollo spacecraft that went to the moon. You have three separate computers in your Corvette.....

Technology Rules

Last edited by 1KULC7; 06-30-2015 at 12:19 PM.
Old 06-30-2015, 12:37 PM
  #13  
USe-car
Pro
 
USe-car's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2014
Location: Georgetown Texas
Posts: 541
Received 40 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

Those 1970's cars weren't as fast as we thought back then. Those numbers proved it. My old 375HP-396CI Chevelle wouldn't keep up with the cars of today.

After the emissions crackdown and fuel mileage standards, I never thought that I would ever see performance like today's cars have. And, they get terrific mileage, and even restart when you try to restart a hot engine.
Old 06-30-2015, 12:38 PM
  #14  
keeks2915
Drifting
 
keeks2915's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,574
Received 154 Likes on 42 Posts

Default

Oh yeah....... And spitting rad fluid on a hot day overheat was common.

You rarely could have a car from that generation without mods sit in stop and go traffic for 30 minutes without overheating..

Technology has come a long way...

It "feels" like I'm going faster in my old car collection than I really am..

I can just imagine the current vette buyers whining about these cars.

1) never in a million years would you find a 70s vette that didn't leak rain..

2) never in a million years would you find one that didn't rattle.

3) never in a million years would you find a vette that could handle safely above 100mph.

4) engines detonated on way higher frequency than modern engines ever do and also had tiny warranties..

5) I thought my sport cups on my z06s were a little dicey in the rain until I remember popping the throttle on my old bias ply vette tires with the car pointing slightly off of straight ahead.

6) modern vettes don't have the automatic lane change feature the 70s vettes had. If you had one you know what I mean... Little dip in the road and you would be two lanes over wondering what happened...

Love the old ones and love my new Z06. Love them all.
Old 06-30-2015, 12:42 PM
  #15  
ovrebo1
Burning Brakes
 
ovrebo1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,170
Received 85 Likes on 65 Posts

Default

Most passenger cars would blow away any pre 1985 performance car. That point has been proven on multiple car shows and websites
Old 06-30-2015, 01:09 PM
  #16  
witch hunt
Burning Brakes
 
witch hunt's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2015
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 937
Received 223 Likes on 205 Posts
Default So---45 years ago...

[QUOTE=Ernest_T;1589949680]I found an interesting web site that has a list of cars and their quarter mile times from 1960-1972. The times come from contemporary road tests published in different car magazines. It's interesting to compare cars from the original golden age of high performance to today. We truly live in an amazing time when our C7 can blow these times out of the water and provide 30 mpg and creature comforts that weren't even dreamed of in the 1960s. The magazine's are listed in parenthesis.

Here's a list from 1970 and the link:

http://roadtests.tripod.com/

this is what we had---basically seat belts had fairly recently become standard equipment. Look at our new vehicles of today---far advanced from the ones sold in 1970 any way you look at it. Then look back 45 years from the '70 models to 1925. I'd say the 1970 models had come a long way from the old black Chevy & Ford cars from back then.

Now, looking forward, what do you think the new 2060 model vehicles will offer in terms of performance, comfort and style? What about price?---you realize if vintage car trends hold, your 2015 C7 should be worth approx. $140,000-200,000 depending on the condition/model/rarity. This might also be the approximate price of a new '60 Vette C12.
Old 06-30-2015, 01:50 PM
  #17  
noel48
Le Mans Master
 
noel48's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2004
Location: Killeen TX
Posts: 5,339
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14

Default

My 1971 Triumph Spitfire went 0-60 in 16 seconds

Get notified of new replies

To How the C7 Stacks Up Against 1970 Performance Cars

Old 06-30-2015, 01:51 PM
  #18  
thegame
Le Mans Master
 
thegame's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2002
Location: Bergen County NJ
Posts: 9,862
Received 491 Likes on 275 Posts

Default

so we can beat up old cars. Good to know lol
Old 06-30-2015, 01:56 PM
  #19  
AFVETTE
Team Owner
 
AFVETTE's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 1999
Location: Swansea IL
Posts: 20,076
Received 41 Likes on 28 Posts

Default

Looking back is fun, but let's look ahead and see how badly the new all electric AWD C9 or C10 will annihilate today's C7.

I mean we could be looking at 0-60 in under 2 seconds?
Old 06-30-2015, 03:36 PM
  #20  
jcp911s
Melting Slicks
 
jcp911s's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,584
Received 1,583 Likes on 795 Posts

Default

How about we compare a 1970 IBM Mainframe to a 2015 Mac Pro?

I love my 71 Corvette, but wouldn't drive it over 80MPH on a bet!!!


Quick Reply: How the C7 Stacks Up Against 1970 Performance Cars



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 AM.