Jay Leno's Take on the 426 Street Hemi

[fisetdavid26]

Most muscle car historians and enthusiasts agree that a muscle car runs the 1/4 mile in the low-15s or better at 90+ mph. Those 4-bbl 327 and 350 Chevelles were more like 16-second cars. I have a test somewhere of a '68 Chevelle with a 327-4 bbl and its 1/4 mile time was something like 16.4 seconds. Certainly better than the average family sedan, but not quite a muscle car.

Not quite a muscle car indeed, my automatic Chevy Cobalt LT Sedan does it in 16.6 seconds... *cough*FWD, 2.2-liter I-4 148 bhp*cough*

I agree about the low-15's quarter mile times to quality as a muscle car.

[henk4]

It is not useless. Henk just gets sore when an American car is faster in the 1/4 mile than a Ferrari.

Ferraris were never intended as boy racer cars....I hope you also read the comments about the understeering of the Coronet TA...

[Fleet 500]

Ferraris were never intended as boy racer cars....I hope you also read the comments about the understeering of the Coronet TA...

But every time it is mentioned that a certain muscle car is faster in the 1/4 mile, you bring up braking and handling.

"Boy racer cars?" Lol.

[henk4]

But every time it is mentioned that a certain muscle car is faster in the 1/4 mile, you bring up braking and handling.

"Boy racer cars?" Lol.

There is more in automotive life than the 1/4 mile...

[Fleet 500]

There is more in automotive life than the 1/4 mile...

I agree; that is why I also like big luxury cars.

But a fast-accelerating car sure is fun!

[Kitdy]

There is more in automotive life than the 1/4 mile...

...and there's more than handling as well.

[jcp123]

Not quite a muscle car indeed, my automatic Chevy Cobalt LT Sedan does it in 16.6 seconds... *cough*FWD, 2.2-liter I-4 148 bhp*cough*

I agree about the low-15's quarter mile times to quality as a muscle car.

True. In context, though, 16's were pretty damn quick considering your average economy car (Datsun 510 or Ford Falcon) was probably running 20-second 1/4 miles - or at the least, 18+.

[harddrivin1le]

The muscle cars have all that low-end torque which really helps them get off the line (if they have good traction, that is).

There's no truth in that statement.

Are you incapable of learning?

A 3,200 pound (with driver) Honda S2000 can run 0 -60 in under 6 seconds and it only produces a max. torque of 146 FT-LB.

DRIVE WHEEL TORQUE is what accelerates a car. At any given speed, drive-wheel torque is a function of engine HORSEPOWER and driveline gearing.

The Yenko 427 Novas did even better. They were said to do 0-60 mph in under 4 seconds.

The only person/people who "said" that were mindless fools.

This Yenko Camaro weighed about the same as the Nova and had the same engine. This one has "modern radials," headers and a modern exhaust system, yet it required 5.8 seconds to run 0 - 60 MPH:

1969 Yenko Camaro 2 Fast 2 Furious Sport Compact Car

[harddrivin1le]

Thanks for the info fleet. My buddy was trying to find out 0-60 mph times for the Hemi Challenger with no luck.

The information he gave is not representative of how production line stock examples ran when they were new (some 40 years ago) and unmodified.

That Charger would need a hotter cam plus the headers and the modern exhaust system to run that fast. They didn't come that way from the factory.

Production line stock 426 Hemis made 350 SAE Net HP and the lightest examples weighed about 3,800 pounds while the heaviest pushed 4,200 pounds.

That is hardly a "fast car" by modern standards and that's the point Jay Leno was making in the video link.

[Fleet 500]

There's no truth in that statement.

Are you incapable of learning?

A 3,200 pound (with driver) Honda S2000 can run 0 -60 in under 6 seconds and it only produces a max. torque of 146 FT-LB.

DRIVE WHEEL TORQUE is what accelerates a car. At any given speed, drive-wheel torque is a function of engine HORSEPOWER and driveline gearing.

That is because the Honda has a very low 1st gear (3- or even 4-series) compared to the typical 2.48:1 of an automatic-equipped G.M. car or the 2.45:1 of an automatic equipped Mopar.

The only person/people who "said" that were mindless fools.

This Yenko Camaro weighed about the same as the Nova and had the same engine. This one has "modern radials," headers and a modern exhaust system, yet it required 5.8 seconds to run 0 - 60 MPH:

1969 Yenko Camaro 2 Fast 2 Furious Sport Compact Car

Yenko Novas weighed several hundred pounds less than the Yenko Camaro.
And Yenko Camaros certainly ran better than 13.7s... just because that one test shows that figure doen't mean they didn't run faster (because they did).
But I don't want to go through all of that again.

[Fleet 500]

The information he gave is not representative of how production line stock examples ran when they were new (some 40 years ago) and unmodified.

That Charger would need a hotter cam plus the headers and the modern exhaust system to run that fast. They didn't come that way from the factory.

Production line stock 426 Hemis made 350 SAE Net HP and the lightest examples weighed about 3,800 pounds while the heaviest pushed 4,200 pounds.

That is hardly a "fast car" by modern standards and that's the point Jay Leno was making in the video link.

Read the specs again... that Charger does have headers and a modern exhaust system.
13s is fast by any standards (for a mass-produced car with street tires).

[Kitdy]

The information he gave is not representative of how production line stock examples ran when they were new (some 40 years ago) and unmodified.

That Charger would need a hotter cam plus the headers and the modern exhaust system to run that fast. They didn't come that way from the factory.

Production line stock 426 Hemis made 350 SAE Net HP and the lightest examples weighed about 3,800 pounds while the heaviest pushed 4,200 pounds.

That is hardly a "fast car" by modern standards and that's the point Jay Leno was making in the video link.

How do you know that it wasn't stock?

Wasn't the 350 SAE net hp based off the 425 gross hp which itself was underrated?

[Fleet 500]

How do you know that it wasn't stock?

Wasn't the 350 SAE net hp based off the 425 gross hp which itself was underrated?

Most likely. The "350" net hp was Chrysler's rating and was underrated just like the "425" gross hp rating was.

Also, the owner of the car said the engine was rebuilt 20 years ago. He didn't mention if it was rebuilt to stock specs but usually car mags will mention when aftermarket parts like cams or pistons are installed.

[Kitdy]

Most likely. The "350" net hp was Chrysler's rating and was underrated just like the "425" gross hp rating was.

Also, the owner of the car said the engine was rebuilt 20 years ago. He didn't mention if it was rebuilt to stock specs but usually car mags will mention when aftermarket parts like cams or pistons are installed.

The car's performance figures are invalid if any of the parts were not stock.

[Fleet 500]

The car's performance figures are invalid if any of the parts were not stock.

They would be, but the owner isn't claiming it is stock.