View Single Post
Old 06-11-2010, 11:47 AM   #97
Jeff Lee
VIP Member
 
Jeff Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Anthem, Arizona
Posts: 2,766
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default Re: Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Ceasrine View Post
I don't know on this one.
1969 AMX 390/315HP
You could either get a good one or a bad one.
Monday and Tuesday built cars were better at American Motors.
My friend had one, and it was generally quick, until he tried to street race a 70 Nova SS396/375HP. The race was over after 15 feet.

JJ,
1964 Modified Production was added to NHRA, for the previous year F/X cars.
AA/S was also added, (7.00 - 8.69 wt/hp) It was purposely set for the previous year 1963 S/S cars and 1964 427 Galaxies.
PC
Generally speaking, a '68-'69 AMX with a 4-speed and 3.54's was a mid to high 14 second car in bone stock condition. Throw a BW auto trans and 3.15 gears and your looking at high 14's low 15's.
I once had a '69 AMX with a bone stock 343 (280 HP) 4-speed and 3.54's. It wouldn't hook on the old Radial T/A's but ran 15.20's. More impressive was the 96 MPH. I thought that was impressive for a mid-sized small block with log exhaust manifolds and a Carter AVS (totally stock engine).
I've also raced bone stock '70 AMX's w/ 390, 4-speed and 3.54's and have gone in the 14.20 range @ around 98 MPH. No reason a '68-'69 AMX should be but a few ticks slower with a 390. I just have never personally raced one.
I had a '70 'Cuda w/ shaker, 440-6, 4-speed and 3.54's. Drum brake and manual steering 'Cuda. It was a rebuilt engine and a .474" purple shaft cam and headers through the factory mufflers. Wouldn't hook, ran 14.40's but at 104-105 MPH. I sure wish I would have put some 4.10's in that Dana and a set of slicks on it and dropped the exhaust! No doubt it would have been in the very low 12's, maybe even in the 11's.
__________________
Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX
Jeff Lee is offline   Reply With Quote