British Musclecars ?

[Doc]

Are the following British Musclecars.

 

 

 

3.0 Capris

 

60s Zodiacs

 

 

 

 

Or is there no such thing ?

[60ftman]

no

[Kieran]

i would say yes

[Mr Sam]

almost........that broadspeed bullet....thats juct crying out muscle car status

 

if thats not muscle car waht is..........and i hope mk14door doesnt mind me borrowing the pic

 

rover SD-1 (especially with a tank engine ) or are we just talkiing fords

[arch]

no i wouldnt call i rover sd1 a muscle car rele its just poo poo a mk3 tina now tht is muscle

[Vista]

I reckon TVR are probably the only Brits that truely qualify as muscle cars, though I guess the Jensen interceptor had a few of the credentials, albeit with an American engine (yes I know many TVR sport an engine that has it's roots in America too)

 

Having driven a couple of TVR's, when they're on song they're awesome. The Griffith 500 my friend had was an absolute hairy chested rocket![/url]

[Doc]

I reckon TVR are probably the only Brits that truely qualify as muscle cars, though I guess the Jensen interceptor had a few of the credentials, albeit with an American engine (yes I know many TVR sport an engine that has it's roots in America too)

 

Having driven a couple of TVR's, when they're on song they're awesome. The Griffith 500 my friend had was an absolute hairy chested rocket![/url]

 

Old healeys might be in with a shot too ! Love a TVR !

[borneo]

As we all know the Mustang is the king of muscle cars. I like to think of my car as being a british equivalent of the mustang.

[Rick]

an old zeph on 100-spokes, hydraulics and a stonking v8

 

o yeah!!! gimme a piece o that

[orionmojo]

what about bristol, jensen, triumph? the old 70's one were rapid, but i'm not so sure about muscle on them

[RFChris]

Y'see you're all missing the point. A muscle car, by definition, is a souped up production model. The American "Muscle" were all based on production cars. Think about it, the Mustang was available as a straight six. As was a Charger or a Challenger. The Impala SS is cool, but its the same shell as a Caprice. But because all the six pots have died, or been converted V8 power we forget that not every car in America is running a 5000bhp big block V8 with Edelbrock this and Offenhauser that!

 

So by that definition then yes, certain old British Fords are muscle cars by our standards. Not by comparison to the Yanks. V6 engines were the biggest here so an RS3100 would deffo be a muscle car in my book. As would a Cortina Savage. After all, both these cars could be bought with a piddly little 1300 engine! These are the types of cars that tick the boxes for muscle status. A car that might well pull your face off from power, but shares its body with an equivalent that couldn't remove the skin from a rice pudding.

 

I wouldn't call a Zodiac a muscle car though, a Zodiac was essentially a higher spec, for the reps. It was never built to be performance. Also TVR's and Bristols and alike aren't muscle either, they live firmly in the gender of "sports car" as they were always destined to be the car that ended up in showrooms. A muscle car is the product of a bored designer with access to current models (at the time) and a key to the parts warehouse!

 

 

Anyway...thats my two cents.

 

Chirs

[dealy]

Is my mk2 2ltr pinto a muscle car????????

[RFChris]

Is my mk2 2ltr pinto a muscle car????????

 

Fook yeah!

 

[dealy]

Excellent

[BudgieV8]

Chris,

Having owned a 1969 Charger 440 R/T (clone) & most of the Pinto/V4/V6 Capri's, I cannot agree with you more my friend!!!

- in fact I think you put it better than I could!

 

The only similarity I would add is that when you park a 1969 Dodge Charger next to a 1971 Cortina Mk3 2-door....

.... Look at the bodylines

- who was copying from who ?

[60ftman]

Y'see you're all missing the point. A muscle car, by definition, is a souped up production model. The American "Muscle" were all based on production cars.

 

So by that definition then yes, certain old British Fords are muscle cars by our standards. Not by comparison to the Yanks. V6 engines were the biggest here so an RS3100 would deffo be a muscle car in my book. As would a Cortina Savage. After all, both these cars could be bought with a piddly little 1300 engine!

 

I kind-of agree with this, but (again) by definition the muscle-car was a factory built souped up model, so whilst a Capri 3.0 or 3.1 would be, a Savage Cortina wouldn't as the conversion was carried out by an outside company.

 

Oh, and TVR's ar poo that only feel fast 'cos they're so f*ck*ng dangerous!

[louie bagel]

i personally think muscle cars are also about the attitued of the person driving it, if you feel its a muscle car you'll drive it like one and anyone else who disagrees's fook em its not theres

 

p.s mk1 cappas for sure and now you mention it mk3 tina's

[60ftman]

i personally think muscle cars are also about the attitued of the person driving it, if you feel its a muscle car you'll drive it like one and anyone else who disagrees's fook em its not theres

 

p.s mk1 cappas for sure and now you mention it mk3 tina's

 

Muscle cars by definition require 'a bit of muscle' under the bonnet. There is NO WAY a 1300 Capri is a muscle car, but a 3.0 Capri is.

 

I've driven a 60's 6-pot Mustang and it's HORRIBLE, but the same year's 6.6 litre V8 is a truly awesome beast.

 

And Mk3 Cortina? what was the biggest engine fitted to them? 2.3?

Ever seen one smoke the tyres for 400 yards?

 

No, nor has anyone else.

[bortaf]

Anything that has an engine bigger than the "main stream" production version

Savage, Perana, Crayford, tricentrol/lumo, superspeed, broadspeed, janspeed

NOT ripspeed

Biggest Mk3 was a 2.0 unless you had one of the above convert it to V6

[tazrocks88]

As we all know the Mustang is the king of muscle cars. I like to think of my car as being a british equivalent of the mustang.

 

i beg 2 differ yes we may be bias towards fords but there is no king of muscle cars as there were differences prefered by some ppl and not by others for example the mustang dodge chargers and plymoth cuda were all emence cars no 1 was the best apart from sales of the mustang as it was cheaper!!!

i do like an elanor (gt500) but i am also quite patial 2 a general lee(charger) not so keen on the cuda

 

oh and the capri was classed as a british muscle attempt and i cant see why it cant qualify just cos it isnt quite as crazy as its yankie cosin

[RFChris]

oh and the Capri was classed as a British muscle attempt and i cant see why it cant qualify just cos it isn't quite as crazy as its yankie cousin

 

And there lies the problem of this debate.

 

Petrol is 3p a tonne in the US. Hence they all had a stonking great V8 motor and we didn't. The Capper was aesthetically a muscle car and the engine range confirmed it. The same shell that ran a 1300 was essentially the same shell that ran a 3100. And thats what a muscle car is, a boggo production car with a massive engine and no thought towards anything sensible.

 

And to say that a muscle car was from the "factory only" would write off cars such as the Shelby and Road and Track. These companies were separate from the producers, yet we still regard their cars as "Muscle"

 

Oh, one thing, don;t school someone who loves, lives and breathes American motors. Not you Tazrocks, that was aimed at 60ftman.

[Doc]

Just seeing if the old gal has british muscle dontcha know .

[V8ian]

I suppose the sleeper in the bunch that nobody has mentioned is the Alpine based Sunbeam Tiger, 4.2 4.7 or 5,0 Factory HOT ROD, AC cobra was built from the AC Ace, Rover P6 3.5?? no rocket but very capable,

There were 6 Humber Scepteres built with Small block Chryslers fitted after Chrysler bought the group, and were a bit purturbed that the Top range V8 car, the Tiger was Ford powered, hence the tiger was so short lived.

Bently Mullsanne Turbo??? Gordon Keebles, 1960s TVR Tuscan 289cui ford powerd short wheelbase monster, Jenson Motors had a Chrysler Hemi powered Interceptor FF four wheel drive car, and I think held the street legal record 1/4 time for over 20 years at the Pod I think it was in the 10s, some of Sydney Allards cars were considered to be cutting edge, and dont forget Sydney Allard has a lot to do with the existace of santa pod being a 60s drag racer, in supercharged anglias and V8 rails

[Slik 50]

O.K. Im not going to sit here and pretend that I now anything about the history of muscle cars becuase I dont!

 

But reading these past post I am a bit confused as to what a muscle car is!

Now I just assumed the muscle cars were primerally, stock "American" cars that have been souped up by a specilist part of the firm or by outside help i.e. Shelby and were sold through factory dealerships.

(basically what Chris has just said)

 

I would not of said the British ever made a muscle car. More, Sports tourers.

Now with that said, and by the above definition, that a muscle car is basically a souped up version of a standard prduction car, I feel that we have made many "Muscle cars" ?

 

I would also go as far to say that Lotus carltons, omegas, cortinas and sunbeams. Cosworths, Brabus mercedes, Alpina BMW's ect are muscle cars. There are loads that you could add to the list.

But I would defanatly say that SD1 rovers are not muscle cars.

[Doc]

For me a muscle car needs to be the biggets engine in a range of cars .

 

1.3 capris are not 3.0 capris are . I think that maybe its a sixties and seventies thing too By bieng british i meant available as standard to the publice and not some imported yank tank for a sixties celebrity .

 

Sunbeam tiger .... Good call !