Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Why Not?? It was a real mean looking car with its open mouth; cool stripes across the bonnet and down the sides of the front quarter panel/

Engine? The big one had a 427cu.in. did it not. Correct me if you will

from my memory the 69 SS Camaro got the 396 big block.This was the model with the flip around headlights. Where the regular Camaros got the 327 and 350 cube engines. The only model that came with the bigger engine than that was the special build Yenko Camaro. it scored the 427 cube Big block. This was the blue Camaro in Fast & Furious 2.

Edited by GTR-32U
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

from my memory the 69 SS Camaro got the 396 big block.This was the model with the flip around headlights. Where the regular Camaros got the 327 and 350 cube engines. The only model that came with the bigger engine than that was the special build Yenko Camaro. it scored the 427 cube Big block. This was the blue Camaro in Fast & Furious 2.

So was the Yenko model also referred to as the 'Nikki' ? I also got the impression that the wheelbase was better suited to cornering than the 'stang and that the front axle was further forward ? Is this correct ?

Love or hate the brand, but the XA/XB Falcon coupes (with suitable wheels) are a very attractive and balanced looking car, from every angle. HQ GTS coupe is pretty good too.

Pantera with the full GT5 Flares, wings and things is a big winner.

365GTB/4 Daytona is awesome but technically 60's.

Lancia Stratos is an amazing looking car...perhaps a bit unfinished from the rear.

240Z is pretty timeless but again I guess its a 60's car.

So was the Yenko model also referred to as the 'Nikki' ? I also got the impression that the wheelbase was better suited to cornering than the 'stang and that the front axle was further forward ? Is this correct ?

dont really know what the whole nikki thing is sorry. As for cornering better than the mustang i doubt it. cant see any reason why the front end would be any different to any other Camaro of that era

There's no argument about the magnificent shape - even performance of the Countach & Esprit T of the 70s.

But can I relay to you what was around in the very early 70s when I'd just become a chemist and still could only afford 'budget'?

They included...

i) Datsun 1600 (my 1st car)

ii) Torana XU-1

iii) MG B

iv) Falcon GT HO Phase II then III.

v) Lotus Europa

These were the dream cars that we could afford with a half a year's pay and could therefore realistically aspire to...

Now here comes the interesting bit...

CHECK OUT HOW MUCH THOSE 5 CARS ARE WORTH TO-DAY!!! MIND-BOGGLING ISN'T IT???

Thanks for correcting me on the Miura which could be definitely conceptualised in the late 60s with the film Italian Job

The Alfetta GT is not as valuable as the 105 that you like so much. But somehow I like that 1974 shape that came out then and became the Alfetta GTV in late 70s as a 2 litre fast cornering bullet. The GTV 6 came out around '84 and won many races in Europe as well as here. It was made famous in Octopussy when 007 stole one and drove it like he...... well you know the rest.

My favourite design? The Alfa Romeo Montreal !

In fact, the Montreal is a 60s design too. First shown as a 4 cylinder concept car at the EXPO in Montreal in 1967, it received the 2.6 litre V8 and a few body revisions when it went on sale around 1971.

The Lamborghini Urraco is another beautiful looking car.

In fact, the Montreal is a 60s design too. First shown as a 4 cylinder concept car at the EXPO in Montreal in 1967, it received the 2.6 litre V8 and a few body revisions when it went on sale around 1971.

The Lamborghini Urraco is another beautiful looking car.

Yes, I stand corrected on the facts of the Montreal. Thanks for that. I've read stories about how lumpy the cams are; to the extent that guys at a set of lights and wearing tight jeans could end up with an erection.

Agree with you on the shape of the Urraco. Very chiselled look. A neighbour 1 Km away has a yellow one - very gaudy.

Cheers, T

GTHO phase 3 was my favourite. best looking aussie car, plus had the performance too. but wow they cost alot now though. love the camaro just saw a ep of overhaulin where they did one up and it actually still had the original engine in it they were all very surprised when they matched the codes up it was a 350 so they just rebuilt it and put it back in, the end result was awsome it looked fantastic, chip foose is a legend all the cars he does always look awsome.

if we are talking about late 60's as well you cant go past the mustang especially the 68' mustangs. mustangs are my favourite car and always will be. one day i will own one i dont care about fuel prices its just something i have to have lol.

  • 1 month later...
  • 11 months later...

And the Best Car Design of the 50s has to go to Alfa Romeo BAT #5 or #7 or #9

Made by Alfa Romeo Berline Aerodynamics Technica = the original Batmobiles.

Only 3 ever rolled out from 'Concept'.

Value now? A cool US$8-10 million!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Ah right. Maybe my rb just loves chewing through batteries lol.
    • On the R34 can't you just unplug the IACV? This is the way I've always done it on the R33. Disconnect IACV, get it idling around 650rpm, and then do a power reset on the ECU to get it to relearn idle (factory ECU).   The big reason no one has touched on as to why you'd want to get the base idle right, is that it means the computer needs to make smaller adjustments to get a good idle at 700-750rpm.   Also, cleaning the IACV won't normally make the car suddenly idle lower or higher. The main issue with the IACV gumming up is that the valve sticks. This means the inputs the ECU gives, aren't translating to changes in air flow. This can cause idle choppy ness as the ECU is now needing to give a lot of input to get movement, but then it moves too far, and then has to do the same in reverse, and it can mean the ECU can't catch stalls quickly either.
    • 12.8 for a great condition, fully charged battery. If the battery will only ever properly charge to about 12.2V, the battery is well worn, and will be dead soon. When I say properly charge, I mean disconnect it from the car, charge it to its max, and then put your multimeter on it, and see what it reads about an hour later. Dieing batteries will hold a higher "surface charge", but the minutest load, even from just a multimeter (which in the scheme of things is considered totally irrelevant, especially at this level) will be enough over an hour to make the surface charge disappear.   I spend wayyy too much time analysing battery voltages for customers when they whinge that our equipment (telematics device) is causing their battery to drain all the time. Nearly every case I can call it within about 2 months of when the battery will be completely dead. Our bigger customers don't even debate it with me any more ha ha ha. A battery at 12.4 to 12.6 I'd still be happy enough with. However, there's a lot of things that can cause a parasitic draw in a car, first of which is alarms and immobilisers. To start checking, put your multimeter into amps, (and then connect it properly) and measure your power draw with everything off. Typical car battery is about 40aH. Realistically, you'll get about half this before the car won't start. So a 100mA power drain will see you pretty much near unstartable in 8 days.
    • Car should sit at 12.2 or more, maybe 12.6 or 12.7 when fully charged and happy. If there is a decent enough parasitic load then it will certainly go lower than 12.2 with time. You can't beat physics.
    • Ok guess I can rule out the battery, probably even the starter and alternator (maybe) as well. I'm gonna clean those leads and see what happens if it's still shit I might take it to an auto electrician. Unless the immobiliser is that f**king heavy, but it shouldn't be.  If I start the car every day, starts up perfectly never an issue. Isn't 12v low, shouldn't it be around 12.5v?
×
×
  • Create New...