View Single Post
Old 06-08-2010, 04:26 PM   #27
Superfan1
VIP Member
 
Superfan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bridgeport,CT.
Posts: 1,993
Likes: 1,666
Liked 2,638 Times in 440 Posts
Talking Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Lee View Post
Hmmm...how about the '67 Mustang 390? What a pig. Now, with NHRA allowed superseded parts (block, heads, ,oil pan, intake, carb), it's super fast!
And when I see a '69 Mach 1 cross the auction blocks with (big bold advertising!) a 390 under the hood for big bucks, I want to yell...sucker!

And I would gladly race a stock '68-'69 340 Dart with a 4-speed and 3.91's against a stock '66 Chevy II 327/350 with 3.73's. I think it would all depend on who was driving.
Jeff, as a general statement, I agree with you. However, I was fortunate enough to have a very fast '67 390, 4-speed. Bone stock, just as it was delivered, it ran 13.8s@103 mph. The other 390 Mustangs were running very high 14s@95 mph! The only cars that I couldn't beat were 396/375 Camaros and Chevelles. To this day I have no idea why it was so much faster than the average 390, but I sure surprised a lot of people with it and I had a lot of fun.
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT
__________________
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT
Superfan1 is offline   Reply With Quote