i just got done watching "Dream Car Garage" muscle car shoot out and the '69 mustang boss 429 came out on top, plus it was the fastes in the 1/4 mile 13.7. the competion was a 426 dual quad hemi challenger,454 ls6 chevelle,455 hurst olds,buick gs,gto judge 455 ram air III, amc amx.
go big blue

 

I watched that program too. I was surprised how poorly the Dodge Challenger did. That would have been my choice for second, but it came in last.

 

the driver did say the clutch was slipping pretty bad on the challenger, i bet it would have done quite a bit better as well. i also think the LS6 chevelle would have done better(maybe even out ran the boss) if it had a 4 speed and not the slush box turbo 400

 

excellent show... i will probobly order the dvd of it..... too bad motortrend tv does not do tests like that!

w00t!

 

Didn't see the show but I owned a new (at the time) '69 Ford Fairlane Cobra Jet 428. I could beat new Dodge Hemis most of the time and new Chevys all the time.

Tire technology then was very primitive. The cars all came from the factory with
f70-14s that I could blow away at any time. I ran drag slicks that in those days had a stiff side wall and drove fine until it got wet.

I am amazed though how slow those old cars were compared to todays cars. A new Mustang Cobra would smoke any of them by at least 2 seconds. My work truck (a chipped F-250 PSD) could beat most of them.

I did enjoy it then. I also wish I had kept it and some other cars I've owned in storage. They would bring a lot of money today.

 

All the cars on the show were run on stock, old school repro bias-ply polyglass tires. The quickest four cars ran in the 13 second range. Can the new Cobra run 11's? The rules for the shootout were pretty specific. No mods whatsoever from stock. If that Boss 429 Mustang had new style slicks, the times would have been MUCH better. We're talking about 450 horsepower, in a very light body.

 

I just picked up "Muscle Car Review", a "Hot Rod Special" magazine for fall 2004.

This is basically a reprint magazine, with some new text around old photos and a compilation of test results from magazines of the day. They also talk about the variations in drivers, stock vs. fooled with, the inconsistency of some cars--i.e. one model runs like a champ, the next one runs like a chimp.

Anyway, it will catch your eye, as the feature on the cover is a '70 Boss 302, in yellow--a factory ad photo with sweet young thing leaning over the front fender.

And the center piece of the mag is "25 Fastest Fords!"

Keep in mind these are results gotten in the day, not now, from many different magazines.


1) '70 Boss 429, 12.30 @ 112. The note says "slicks" and the text indicates some other fooling including headers, shocks, remove brake booster, tuning...

2) 62 Shelby Cobra with a 260, 12.90 @114 (huh? 2385 lbs, 3.54 open diff)

3) 66 Shelby Cobra with 427, 13.20 @110 (comp model 12.30 @121)

4) 70 Cougar 428 auto, 13.23 @ 103.39 (Driven for the test by Don Nicholson)

5) 69 Boss 429, 13.27 @ 107. Text says base runs were high 13s, the fiddled with it to get to 13.27. Pulled smog, traction bars...


Someone said he has a 69 Fairlane 428: Way down the pack at 21: 13.96 @ 101

Number 25 is a hi po 65 Mustang Htp. 14.00 @ 100.

They list the next 6 as the "slow" group, running 14.00 @ 102 for 66 Shelby GT 350 down to--surprise--a 66 427 Fairlane, running 14.50 @ 100.

These cars must have made a lot of smoke to get these times.

The fastest they list were A/FX cars--65 Mustang Htp with a 427 2 4V 4 gear running 10.90 @ 130.16, and ending with a 63 F100 XL PU running the 2 4V 427 to 12.72 @ 106.

On newstands now.

 

OK, now from the Sept '04 Road & Track Road Test summary:

Mustang Mach 1: 13.7 @ 105.7
SVT Mustang Cobra: 13.4 @ 107.0

Ford GT: 12.2 @ 121.6

BMW M3: 13.5 @ 105.8

New Corvette: 12.7 @ 115.2

Viper: 12.2 @ 119.6

Honda Accord V6 Coupe: 14.8 @ 97.2

GTO: 13.9 @103.6

Saleen S7: 11.8 @ 119.9

for the high dollar crowd:
M Benz E55 AMG: 12.4 @ 116.4 @ $76000

Porsche Carrera GT: 11.3 @ 131.6 @ $440,000. 10 cylinders, no waiting.

GT 3, which appears to be "normal" @ $99,900: 12.4 @ 113.8

Back to earth:

Subaru Impreza WRX STi: 13.3 @ 103.

It looks like most cars run in the 14-s and 15s.

Oh, I spotted a 10.9 @ 139.5. That would be your Porsche 911 GT-1 from the 9/98 issue, listed at $1,000,000. I'm sure you can find them on the used lots now or as lease returns for less.

 

The Boss 429 is a monster of a car. It ran a very low 13 at 110 mph with the skinny bias plys. Slicks would have been nice. You mean you don't have a pair of 911-GT-1's in your garage?

 

With modern tires? The 429 is posting 1/4 mile times at 12.3 (admittedly with some "tuning"), so where is that 10 second Cobra? Go to:
http://popularmechanics.com/automoti...rs/print.phtml

Actually has a pretty good article comparing old to new, with modern rubber. Some people forget how fast the Buick GNs where and still are.

 

Subaru faster than Hemicuda and 428 Mustang? Huh?

Accord Coupe feels just like a W30 442 when you stand on it?

I wonder how fast an Accord would run with headers, the accessories disconnected, slicks, and leave the spare tire at home......

 

the cobra they tested was not the new supercharged one. the new one runs 0-60 in 4.8 and 1/4 mile in 13.0 at 110.7 mph bone stock. in the aug 2003 "Mustang and Fast Fords" magizine they have a tuned up(smaller pulley,chip,cat back exhaust,free flow intake) 2003 cobra that runs mid 11's at 120 mph. the stock boss ran a 13.7 in the shootout.

 

I watched that show too. I bet the bow tie boys are still grumbling about the results. Tough...that's the way it is. I'm surprised that the AMX didn't do better than it did.

Those old cars weren't "slow", the primary limitation was the tire technology at that point in time. Today's cars are better at putting the power to the ground, but put a set of good radials on one of those muscle cars and it's like night and day.

MR

 

MrOldv8 has a great point. My dad and I have discussed this several times. I think horsepower numbers back then were not as accurate. Some cars were apparently rated lower than the actual HP just for insurance reasons. Might stand true today as well, but I doubt it. I know, it just makes it more confusing...

Cars with seemingly less HP turn as fast times, are more user-friendly, and much more fuel efficient than some cars of the past.

My argument is/was that regardless of how much power you have, you still have to put it to the ground. Torquey big blocks with leaf spring suspensions, outdated suspension components such as shocks, bushings, etc. are part of an old era.

When you got "GO", you also need "WHOA". 4 wheel discs, larger rotors, 2 3 or 4 piston calipers, low profile tires, better weight distribution, etc. I think all play a factor. Tighter tolerances throughout the vehilcle could also play a factor.

Don't get me wrong- I still love new vehicles, and future gains will always be interesting. But it still cracks me up to hear someone boast about something like a V-10 powered Viper keeping pace with a 1965 Shelby Cobra. 0-100 and back to 0 in 13.2 seconds...yes, without trick anti-lock 4-wheel disc brakes, fuel injection, $500 tires, modern fuels, onboard computers, etc. Oh, the little 90" wheelbase Cobra only had a V-8.

Not only do you have to get the power to the ground, you then have to drive it. Kinda like comparing a Lear jet with a Sopwith Camel.

This is of course just my opinion...
Greg

 

The Boss 429's were built by Kar Kraft of Brighton, MI. There were 857 1969 Boss 429 Mustangs and 499 1970's. They were rated at 375 hp. The purpose was to meet NASCAR's production requirements to qualify them for stock car racing.