I find the Math Interesting. Your logic makes sense. Just an observation - The 50 Fastest Chart is different from the data downloaded from Muscle Cars Illustrated List. Compare the ET & MPH of the 1969 440 six-pack Super Bee between the lists. Compare the 1969 Roadrunner 440 six-pack between the lists. It only made one list. My Opinion - You proved the science, that's what is important. The world has too many lists. Nice Work - Thank You
If I remember correctly, the biggest variable was the way the cars were tested as I'm pretty sure it was different based on the magazine. They obviously weren't all on the same tire, track surface or run at the same ambient temperature. Those were the days we lived in and it is what it is. Your math does bring the group to a common denominator so to speak by giving them all the same rear gear ratio. But, then you have to take into consideration that the transmission ratios are also different, in an era where an auto trans would probably put the car at a disadvantage, unlike today's 10 speeds. Unfortunately those magazine missed a few models that would have placed on that list, but thats life. Our only source of information in that day and age, was waiting patiently for your monthly magazines. We literally got new car information no more than once every 30 days. 😬
One of the Guy's at the local Drag strip put 4.10 gears into his 1972 Superduty and teh car went 3 tenths slower because the car run out of steam 300 feet fro the finish line. Over rev these engines and they fall on their face!
Why would the full size Chevy Impala be on the list and not the full size Ford Galaxie? The 63 1/2 R code 427 cars run the 1/4 in about 12.5 secs which would make it 3rd on the list and they predate all of them.
I find the Math Interesting. Your logic makes sense. Just an observation - The 50 Fastest Chart is different from the data downloaded from Muscle Cars Illustrated List. Compare the ET & MPH of the 1969 440 six-pack Super Bee between the lists. Compare the 1969 Roadrunner 440 six-pack between the lists. It only made one list. My Opinion - You proved the science, that's what is important. The world has too many lists. Nice Work - Thank You
🥝✔️ Thanks Rich.
If I remember correctly, the biggest variable was the way the cars were tested as I'm pretty sure it was different based on the magazine. They obviously weren't all on the same tire, track surface or run at the same ambient temperature. Those were the days we lived in and it is what it is. Your math does bring the group to a common denominator so to speak by giving them all the same rear gear ratio. But, then you have to take into consideration that the transmission ratios are also different, in an era where an auto trans would probably put the car at a disadvantage, unlike today's 10 speeds. Unfortunately those magazine missed a few models that would have placed on that list, but thats life. Our only source of information in that day and age, was waiting patiently for your monthly magazines. We literally got new car information no more than once every 30 days. 😬
Can we get a copy of that spreadsheet?
Add a column for positions gained or lost . ex, +2 or -4. Great work!
To many variables ! weight - gearing - horsepower - torque - aerodynamics - tire size - temp - elevation - track conditions - driver etc....
One of the Guy's at the local Drag strip put 4.10 gears into his 1972 Superduty and teh car went 3 tenths slower because the car run out of steam 300 feet fro the finish line. Over rev these engines and they fall on their face!
Cobra did not have automatics, getting off the line with the lower gears would be more difficult.
Why would the full size Chevy Impala be on the list and not the full size Ford Galaxie? The 63 1/2 R code 427 cars run the 1/4 in about 12.5 secs which would make it 3rd on the list and they predate all of them.
That's one of the issues with the list, is the magazines didn't test some of the best ones.. the 66 R code fairlane isn't on there eithet
@@Wheelhouse812 Nor any of the 427 equipped Mercurys.
2 @@afwoods
Very nice work. Much more of an apples to apples comparison.
Rear tires?