Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

[Lew Silverman]

2X on the 327/350 HP Chevy II - The best bang for the buck back in the day!

[FINESPLINE]

Bill ( Grumpy ) Jenkins thought those Chevy II 's with the 327/350 combination ran good too!

[FINESPLINE]

As far as the factory slugs went , the street Hemi cars were no fun to own. If you were not mechanically inclined it was not much of a street cruiser. A plug eating, oil burning detuned race motor. BUT, Love it and a lot of TLC and some mods , it was a bear. The 6 pack wedge motors were usually faster on the street at a lot less cost.

[W J]

A friend bought a brand new 1964 Corvette Midnight Blue/blk int. fastback coupe w/327 365hp (single Holley w/solid lifters & good cam), close ratio Muncie 4 sp, w/4.10 posi rear....pretty sure the car cost less than $6k. The Vette w/that powertrain combo was a screamer-- there wasn't much of anything Detroit built and street-legal that could touch it in '64-5 ....that's my pick for over-performer.....As far as poor performing muscle, I'd have to pick any of the cross-fire fuel injection Corvette models, along with the crossfire injected Camaros.Think they were 1982-1984 vintage and both were very disappointing.... WJ

[Paul Ceasrine]

The bad thing about the 69' Boss 429, if anything went wrong with the internals, you were screwed, it was a fortune to repair.
I'll throw in a 1970 Pontiac GTO 400/350HP.
I had one. A 3700lb. pig with an 'Endura' bumper.
Somewhat pretty, but it went 'nowhere fast'
PC

[bigshow2966]

In the hands of the general public most anything with multiple carbs was usually a slug.

Buddy of mine used to have an L-88 Vette that I could roast at any time with a 340 Dart.

[Jeff Lee]

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 Now, with NHRA allowed superseded parts (block, heads, ,oil pan, intake, carb), it's super fast!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.

[k.pascoe]

1976 Trans Am 455 4 speed; hurt my feelings it was soooo slowwwww

[kennyd]

although not a car the ss454 pick ups were turds

[blkjack]

Originally Posted by k.pascoe

1976 Trans Am 455 4 speed; hurt my feelings it was soooo slowwwww

IF you think that was slow should have driven a stock "corporate" 6.6L in 79. 16 sec is an awful long time.