Race this brand new '57 Plymouth?
Click on the picture of the '57 Plymouth. http://www.buriedcar.com/tulsarama.asp "The future isn't what it used to be." |
My brither will be there for the unveiling, thought this was a pretty cool deal. It will interesting to see how it faired.
|
That's VERY cool...Now, does anybody want to wager on it's condition? They supposedly "took every precaution" when they buried it, but obviously technology then isn't what it is today.
My heart hopes that it's in pristine condition, but my head is telling me that it will only be in good condition at best. When EXACTLY is the unveiling? Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
Fri June 15 @ 12:00 noon
Capsule opening 6:30 same day bp133 Bob Pagano |
I was just talking to a city worker today and they are wagering the vault will be full of water. According to him the vault is going to be unearthed under a tent with only invited guests attending. The general public will be allowed to watch via closed circuit tv at the civic center which is very near by the capsule site.
Should be intersting. Maybe one of my relatives guessed the population correctly. Mike M. Cotten |
oh man,, if the vault is full of water.......
The case of Schlitz beer ought to be quite a collectors item... Jack? "The future isn't what it used to be." |
I don't know about the car but I bet Country Dog would want the Schlitz beer.
Greg |
Thats some pretty interesting reading. It was obviously quite the town event the day they did this. I agree with Jason that I doubt the car will be pristine when they open up the vault. Of course I hope for the best.
Hopefully someone will stay on top of this so we'll know next weekend how it all went. My only memories of 1957 are going to sign up for kindergarten with my mom, and eveyone standing out in the street looking up at night trying to find Sputnik. I don't know if we really saw it, but we all thought we did. Damn,, I'm getting old! Danny Durham |
Sputnik! That night we all were looking too - and we had just got a cat that day and named it Sputnik. Gee....next car name? Not many would get it.
"The future isn't what it used to be." |
What's a sputnik? [:-good-:]
Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
Jason,
In case you're NOT kidding (which is entirely possible), I'll answer that. "Sputnik" was the name Russia gave their satellite, which was launched into earth orbit in 1957, thereby launching the "space race." It was the first successful satellite launch of that nature... by anyone. I remember going downtown (Little Rock, Arkansas) on several nights,(about 2:00 a.m.,) in September of 1956 (I was 17) and watching them unload the new '57 cars off the trailers and drive them into the showrooms, which had their windows blanked out by opened-up newspaper sections. The cars were carried on trailers with car-covers on them, so nobody could tell what the new cars looked like. It was all cloaked in secrecy, and very exciting! Most cars were all-new (body-wise) for 1957, except some G.M. cars, which had re-do's so extensive that they LOOKED all-new. The stodgy styling of the '56 Plymouth had given way to a space-age, finned, creation whose slogan was "SUDDENLY, IT'S 1960!!!" LOL! The year 1957 was a landmark year for gearheads because nearly all cars that year, offered high performance engine packages. Chevys were now available with fuel injection and 1 hp per cubic inch, and you could get multiple carburetion on about 90-percent of the cars offered. Dual-quad Cadillacs, Chevys, Chryslers, Dodges, Plymouths, DeSotos, Fords, Mercurys, and three-two-barrel setups on Pontiac, and Oldsmobile, were offered, while supercharged engines were available on Fords, Packards, and Studebakers, which gave nearly everyone a fast NEW car, if you opted to pay the freight on the package. DeSoto matched Chevrolet with a 345 HP, 345cid engine in its "Adventurer" high-end car that year. Even Rambler had a performance car, the "Rebel," with a 327 motor that made 255 HP in a light car... It was probably the most exciting year ever, for a "car guy." Certainly, up to that point, although 1955 was just as exciting for its styling revelations. I remember being surprised that a Chevy didn't witn Stock honors at the NHRA Nationals (Okie City) that year. The top stocker there turned out to be a '57 Pontiac stick shift 2-door sedan with the 317-HP Tri-Power option, which was available with a ~VERY~ nasty, solid-lifter cam... It went 94-mph on street tires, through the mufflers, with the air cleaner "on." That was back when "stock" meant "STOCK!" http://www.classracer.com/html/happy.gif 1957... that wonderful year... Bill |
Bill,
Thanks for the history lesson. I think I was born 10 to 15 years too late! Bob Rice |
Bob,
If you were going to be 69 this year, you wouldn't feel that way; trust me!!! :http://www.classracer.com/html/happy.gif Bill |
Thanks for the memories, Bill. I knew there were a few on here that remembered what Sputnik was all about. Danny Durham
|
Bill,
I was kidding, as I did know what Sputnik was, but I'm glad I made my smart-*** remark because it caused you to write your little history lesson, which I enjoyed. Unfortunately, I had the pleasure of being a kid during the time of the gas-crunch, and by the time I was old enough to drive the great cars I had to choose from were those classics like the '78 Aspen, or maybe if I was lucky an '81 K-car. I just wish I would have somehow found the money at the time ($20K - $40K) to have purchased at least one Hemi car. That would have been difficult given I was only making $3.35/hr. at the time, but given that those cars now sell for over $300K, I'm kicking myself for not begging, borrowing, and stealing from every person that I could have (I would have paid back the people that I stole from). Oh well...I have a few more woulda, coulda, shouldas for you if you'd like to hear them... Thanks again for the interesting perspective! Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
Danny and Jason,
Thanks for the kind words. I am not qualified to give lessons in anything, but it is fun to talk about how things used to be, and how they've changed. The main two things that have changed since I started going the drags in 1955 are how fast the average car is, now, and how much "speed" costs. For example, the average new car in 1955 had the capability of running the standing-start quarter-mile in about 19 seconds at perhaps 72 mph. There were faster cars, such as the "power pack" versions that had a 4bbl-carb and dual exhausts (most of them could manage mid-to high 17-second times in showroom trim), but the great majority had small V8s, single exhausts and a small, two-barrel carb. The horsepower race had already taken off, however, and this 1955 average climbed astronomically the next few years, and by 1965, the average car's performance had jumped to a quarter-mile average of probably mid-16's. Of course, the birth of the musclecar era in 1964, with the advent of the GTO, and all its competitors, had changed the perception of what constituted a "fast car", forever. The run-of-the-mill '64 GTO's I watched at the strip, with showroom trim and street tires, would usually run high 14's through the mufflers, at about 98-99 mph. Lots of their competitors were no faster, with the slowest of the bunch that I RECALL, being the 390 Ford GTA Mustangs and Fairlanes, clocking in at 15.30s... Boy, howdy; has THAT changed!!! But, that was enough to bring the average car into the 15-second range. Engines had grown by leaps and bounds, with big block everything appearing in family sedans, which usually made the grocery-getter a lot nore fun to drive. We all know what happened in the '70s, with lowered compression for unleaded gas, and the gas crunch making performance a naughty word in Detroit, so the march toward fast cars was put on hold during that sad period. The '80s weren't much better, but did give us a V8 Mustang with potential, and some worthwile fuel injected motors from Chevy. By the late '80s, things were starting to look up again, and by the time the nineties got rolling, the Viper and LT-1 motors heralded the dawning of a new performance era that is going great guns, today, with supercharged Cadilacs, and 600 HP American sports cars on the horizon. One interesting phenomenon I have noticed is the creeping up of what is considered the "norm" in the overall performance of "average cars." A case in point would be the 2007 Toyota Camry, a front-wheel-drive, soccer-mom sedan with NO sporting pretentions. I don't have any hard data on that particular car, but Car and Driver road tested its big brother, the 2007 Avalon about a year ago, and it ran the quarter in something like 14.6 at 99 mph. The Camry V6 gets the same engine (no changes) in a lighter car, so there's no way it''s going to run less than 100 mph in the quarter. This 3.5-liter, automatic, soccer-mom car, with NO sporting aspirations, is going to tour the quarter-mile quicker than a bone-stock '64 GTO "MUSCLECAR" did.! and, that is the NORM, today!!! Back around 1960, I had a (partnership) race car (B/Gasser) that ran competitively with several others in my class, and it NEVER ran 100mph on its best day!!! ('35 Pontiac coupe/'55 Olds/Hydro/Engle cam/3 2bbls/milled heads/4.27:1 rear gears/BRUCE slicks) Wooopeee ding dong! See my point? The perception of what constitutes "fast" has changed dramatically, since I became involved in drag racing. When I graduated from high school in 1956, any street car that could run in the 15s was "God-awful FAST!" Now, a 15-second car on the street is just a normal grocery-getter and no great shakes. The downside of all this is the cost of quick acceleration. I don't have to tell any of you how much the cost of racing has escalated in recent years, but the extent to which just building a reasonably-quick street car has climbed can be astonishing when you consider what was possible in, say, 1972. I had a'64 Valiant I had paid $750.00 for the previous year, and it had a 273 V8, but was somewhat anemic, by my standards. I located a low-mileage '71 340 in a junkyard, and bought it (complete), along with its bell-housing, clutch, 4-speed, driveshaft, and 8.75" Sure-Grip rear end, for $500.00. It had 13,000 miles on it. It bolted into the Valiant with only one hitch; the exhaust manifolds wouldn't fit, so I put a set of $35.00 (no kidding!) fenderwelll headers on it. Some $8.00 slapper-bars, blocked heat risers, and a pair of M & H slicks borrowed from my ex-partner, Harry Sparks, and I had myself a low 13-second street car. The Demon I pulled it out of had a 3.91:1 gear, so I was okay, there. Total cost was just under $1,500.00 1972 dollars, including the cost of the car! That would be $7285.00 today... according to this online cost-of-living calculator. Was it a good deal? It made me smile... At any rate, hot rodding continues to be one of the best and most educational ways to spend your time and money, I think. I am just amazed at how fast some of you guys can make a legal Stocker go... Thanks for the excitement and education you have provided for me over the years! You guys are the best.... Bill |
Cool stuff there Bill. Hard to think you couldn't crack 100 mph in the gasser. Wild. Love to find a set of Bruce slicks !
Jason: Don't feel too bad about not buying a Hemi way back when. I was smart enough to know better too, when in 1969 my cousin offered to sell me his hot rodded '63 split window Vette. It was only a 283 at the time of the offer, but it was a 4 speed and of course that was way cool when you're 16. (I was.) But my 1.65 an hour grocery job and the fact that my Dad wouldn't lend me the money killed that deal. Oh, how much? $1400 dollars....... "The future isn't what it used to be." |
Matador Man, http://www.classracer.com/html/happy.gif
There were a couple of reasons why that old tub wouldn't go 100, not the least of which was, it sat "tall in the saddle" and had the aerodynamics of a barn door. The cam was an Engle 116, which was a quick-rate-of-lift, short duration model, that was better-suited to a dirt track than the drag strip... shoulda gone with the more aggressive "95." This thing floated the valves at 5,800 rpm, and we were turning that just before the traps.... it was kind of like a mechanical rev-limiter/speed-limiter. Our competition wasn't equipped to match our 60-foot times, which were amazingly good for such an otherwise s-l-o-w car, so if they beat us (which they did, a lot!!!) they always had to catch us. We learned, early-on, that the only way to make a Hydro car competitive was to make it hook 100-percent, so we locked the rear end, ballasted the back of the car, and ran slicks that would allow us a full-throttle stall launch with no wheelspin. We had a car that ran inordinately fast for the first block, and not so fast for the next 3 blocks. :( I think our usual e.t. was a 13.80, which sounds absurd, now, but was right in the middle of the field at the time. We won as much as we lost... but never won anything significant. Our only claim to fame with that car was to garner runner-up B/G honors to Don Biggers at the '62 AHRA Nationals at Green Valley (Texas.) If I had to guess, I'd think we had maybe $1,000 1962 dollars in the whole car... engine, hydro, and all. That equates to just over $6,700.00 in today's currency. What kind of a race car can you build for that kind of money, today? Not much... and, we didn't HAVE much, but we were relatively competitive in class racing (no handicap racing back then; everything was heads-up), AND we had a ton of fun with that ol' heap. However, it's humiliating to think that a showroom 2007 Toyota Camry sedan can turn more MPH in the quarter than we ever did, though... LOL! My, my; how times change.... Bill |
Quote:
It's funny you use that as an example, because though you probably don't know it, that's the car I race today. I could have NEVER afford to buy this car now, but I was lucky enough to have had a dad that bought the car in 1964, and kept it. It's not much of an original '63 Corvette anymore (the body and trim parts, and even the body has been cut), but I do still have MOST of the original parts for it (the drivetrain was blown up or sold LONG ago). The funny thing is, I'm not sure the original parts are really worth anything to me, because if I were to ever put the car back on the street, I would not put it back to all original. The car would be a Pro Street car, and even then, I'm not sure I wouldn't just go buy replica parts from Eckler's for the stuff that I did want to put back on the car. There is a downside to owning this car, and it's that I can't sell it. Not that I would want to, but I would LOVE to build a purpose-built race car, but I can't afford to do so without selling what I have. If my dad never sold the car for the 27 years he owned it, I'm certainly not going to tarnish the family name by doing so! What's weird is what just struck home with me...I've now "owned" the car for 16 years since my dad passed away. It's hard to believe that the car has been in my care for that long, and that in 10 years I will have had it in my possession just as long as my dad did. But, I've never really considered myself the owner of this car. It's my dad's car, and I'm just borrowing it until he tells me I can't use it anymore. Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
I didn't know. I'll have to go to Autoimagery and look you up sometime.
With the year restriction lifted off the GT class I've dreamed about putting a Pontiac in an early Vette. Wouldn't THAT irk some purists. ha! "The future isn't what it used to be." |
Bill,
When you fist posted about cost, I was going to make a comment about how with inflation the money that you spent in the 60's was probably worth more than you thought today. But, you've already done the calculations, and quite honestly I'm surprised to see that it's really that little. Obviously, you can't do much with $7,500 today speed-wise, but I almost wonder if the cost to go a specific ET hasn't changed over the years. What did it cost to build a car in the 60's that would run in the mid-9's? Adjusted for inflation, would that really be much different than today? I'm not sure... Like you said, people's perceptions of speed had changed a lot over the years. It amazes me the HP that bone-stock cars have today, and nobody thinks twice about it. My 1994 Suburban with a 350 is rated at something like 210 hp. My 2006 Pacifica with a 6-cylinder makes something like 225 hp. Yet, I hook my enclosed trailer up to my Suburban occasionally, but I couldn't imagine doing so with my Pacifica. Upon browsing RacingJunk.com, it does seem quite feasible to put together something that could run probably in the mid-12's for about $7,500...less if you'd be willing to live with a roadster like a bantam or something like that. Using a car like that, you could probably get in to the mid-10's pretty easily, though the only thing you could run with it is Super Pro. Plus, you know as well as I do that any car that you would run today would be much safer than anything of the same speed from 40 to 50 years ago. Of course, it wouldn't be a classic! [:-happy-:] Now, if you said you wanted to run the SAME class for $7,500, well, then we'd have a problem. Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
Jason,
I can understand your position totally. I'm borrowing a car that might be worth "God knows how much", but it doesn't really matter...it might as well be worth ten bucks... |
>> by the time I was old enough to drive the great cars I had to choose from were those classics like the '78 Aspen
Hey now! ;-) Maybe my 1980 Plymouth version is a 'step up'? Ricardo Monteban says so... ;-) How's the "new" ride, Dan? Michael Beard <u>Staging Light Graphic Design & Printing</u> Duck Tape/Loctite Racing H - I - J/CM '80 Volare 360 Magnum |
All,
There is breaking news on the 57 Plymouth. See link below. The vault is full of water.): http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/artic...reaking%20News Jim Hashbarger NHRA 395959 IHRA 41562 |
full of water ???? PERFECT !
57 plymouth was a friggin BOAT anyway !!!!!!!!!! captain jack |
If the darn transmission needs to be worked on I sure hope they don't call me! Anybody ever had to work on one of those old cast iron tourqeflites?
Jim Cimarolli |
Jason Oldfield asked:
>>> "What did it cost to build a car in the 60's that would run in the mid-9's? Adjusted for inflation, would that really be much different than today? I'm not sure..." <<< That question has a problem associated with it. The problem is, due to the quantum leap that performance took due to technological changes between 1960 and 1969, it becomes very complicated to try to say what it would cost to run 9.50's. By that, I mean, what did we have to work with in terms of motive power in 1960? 348 Chevy motors, FE Ford motors with no really good heads, and 413 Wedge Mopars with mediocre heads. The 392 Hemi was available, of course, and was actually running some high 9-second passes (Big JOHN MAZMANIAN's '41 Willys A/GS car), but it would be a couple of years before he, or anybody else in A/GS ran a legitimate 9.50. I think. The A/G Supercharged engines had stroker cranks, girdles, gobs of porting, and a 6:71 blower to propel their 2,400-pound doorslammer bodies to what were then, considered astronomical times (high 9's.) So, in 1960, you'd need an A/Altered (25% engine setback) and probably a blower to run 9.50's on gasoline. This would in no way be a street-legal car. Also, the blower and high-gear-only clutch (dual-disk) setup would be pretty expensive. Fast-forward to 1969. By then, the 426 Hemi had made its appearance in the '64 Mopars, and Ford's Hi-Riser FE 427's were in Fairlanes, Galaxies, and certain Mercurys, while Chevrolet had gone through the 409's, Z-11's and the 396 "Mystery engine" in 1964 that became the canted-valve "Rat Motor" that is still very much with us today in everything from Stock to PRO Stock. So, going 9.50s in 1969 was a WHOLE LOT easier than it had been just 9 years earlier, due to the new engines that were available. So, the answer would be pretty different, you see... Of course, this "new tech horsepower" wasn't necessarily CHEAP, but it was widely available, and deals could be found. I'd say that by 1969, a 9.50 car could be built for probably five or six thousand dollars. That would be a '62 Nova with a blown 427/Turbo 400 drivetrain, for instance... That computes to about $27.500 "2007 dollars." Of course, that is pure speculation on my part, but that's the way I remember it. I suppose that today, if you took a 5.0 Mustang and turbocharged it to within an inch of its life, you could probably go 9.50 with it for a lot less than that... once or twice, but the short block would die unless you spent some real money on strong stuff. So, maybe the cost of speed hasn't gone up as much as I'd thought.... This has been an interesting exercise, I think. Hey, Jason, I'll bet everybody asks you the same thing, ("Any relation to 'Barney' Oldfield???") http://www.classracer.com/html/happy.gif Bill |
Quote:
It's somewhat funny because I can't tell you how many people have come up to me and asked me if I'd consider selling my car. My stock response now is, "You don't have enough money." I know it's crazy because I could build one hell of a race car for this, but if somebody offered me $100,000 for my car as a rolling chassis, I'd turn them down. That would be a no-brainer for me. $1,000,000 would probably be hard to turn down, but nobody's going to offer me that, so I don't have to worry about that ever happening. I wonder if you also have this never ending fear of something happening to your prized possession. My fear doesn't keep me from racing my car, because that's all I've ever known the car to do, but I'd be absolutely heartbroken if something ever did happen to it. I've already told my wife that if the house is ever on fire, I will get her and the kids out first, but if there's ANY way I can go back into the garage, I will to get that car out. Stupid dads having good relationships with their sons and teaching them about cars... Quote:
Quote:
All that said, I AM related to the "Barney" Oldfield who was a member of the Motown Missile Pro Stock team. That's my uncle, Dick Oldfield, who actually drove the car in 1970 before Don Carlton took over in 1971 (Chrysler actually forced my uncle out of the driver's seat, as they felt a "better" driver would help the longevity of the Torqueflite, so they tabbed Carlton as the new driver, who then refused to drive the car unless a 4-speed was put in it, which they proceeded to do). Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
Quote:
They said in one of the articles that the car still feels solid, which I don't doubt. Whoever is the first person to sit in that car though better make sure they have their wet suit on, otherwise it's going to look like they just got done peeing themselves... Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
it was rusted into junk... should have left her buried in respect to all those dead 57 vehicles whom passed on before her !!!!
flying my flag at 1/2 mast today... captain jack |
Jack,
I don't know what else anyone could have expected, they had to know that it was going to be full of water, or at least had been during the 50 years the car was under the ground. What kind of beer was in there? ****tz or Fallflat? Jim Cimarolli |
And here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9iaWIk8H3U Mark Yacavone Blue Streak Promotions Old and In The Way |
So, who was the "lucky winner"? I'm guessing they didn't take the car home with them...
Might be able to clean up the body enough to make it into a street rod (though by the looks of it you'd have to gut the rest). Jason Oldfield S/G & S/ST 1838 |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.