Hi I just found this, I'm the driver of the car in the video. I drove the cars for Bud for several years when his son was in the service. His offices were in the same building as the advertising agency that I worked for as a graphic designer, and photographer. Bud did filming for some TV commercials for us. He was friends with my boss and he asked if I could get off from work on Fridays to drive the cars for him. I was a SCCA racer at the time so I was qualified to do the job. I also got to go along as a still photographer to places like Indy and Mid Ohio where I got to meet people like Paul Newman, Mario Andretti, Al Unser etc. I still think those days, what a blast. I'm 78 now but I still drive a hot Honda Accord 6 speed coupe that will do 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds. Mike
Hi I was the driver for a couple of years, probably 1969 and 1970. This was while Buds son Dave was in the service. When Dave got out he took over the driving again. In one instance he flipped a DeTomaso Pantera onto its roof! I had several failures a 428 Ford Torino blew it's engine when I was flat out down the straight at Grattan Raceway. A Ford, a Galaxie had the front wheel collapse while going through a turn, I almost ran over Bud who was filming from the edge of the track. I later shared an office building with Car and Track Productions, when I started my own graphic design business and he gave me connections to many automotive clients that we had. Bud know everyone and filmed for NASCAR and even Paul Newman. I got to meet a lot of interesting people through Bud. Sadly Bud died when he was only 58, and his son Dave took over the business, but he too died young at only 50 and Car and Track ended. Mike
"the gas gauge required constant checking, this car was thirsty ... ALL the time"! Back then one would say; "hell yeah it's fast, it'll pass anything... except a gas station"
@@markball7028 I remember 51 cents a gallon, and that was full service. Back then you had to be adept at the math, because the pump readout didn't include the tax, so you did it in your head and stopped short, to keep it an even 5 bucks etc.
Very good trap speed for the 14.5 sec time, but the tires back then could not handle that amount of torque. With modern tires it would run in the 13's easily.
A bit of trivia : Oprah ran a 13.22 on B.F. Goodrich's in '68 She wore pigskin driving gloves and Converse shoes. She skipped wearing a helmet to save weight/time.
Thanks for sharing info. Most excellent videos. I started driving in 1983 and drove similar models as "used" cars. Not far from home was some rural roads with turns and elevation changes :P None of my cars accelerated/braked/handled particularly well, which is why they where fun to drive. I quickly learned that shocks and anti-sway arm bushings don't last the life of the car. Chris
Best line in Bud Linderman Car review. “The Gas Gauge required constant checking!!! It’s Thirsty All The Time!!!” I would say the 428, 4 barrel is the exciting cause for that gas mileage.👍🏼💨
The problem with the '68 Shelby (and regular Mustang) is the puny 16-gallon gas tank. A 428 driven hard is probably getting 6-7 mpg, so that tank runs dry pretty quickly!
Hi It took some digging but I found the picture of Bud and I with the same car that's in the video. i1238.photobucket.com/albums/ff491/nohjekim/Mike%20and%20Bud%20filming%20Car%20amp%20Track%20segment_zps6tzoi2yx.jpg In the for what it's worth department, my Austin Healey Sprite, that was my race car is in the Gilmore Automobile Museum on display for 6 months. i1238.photobucket.com/albums/ff491/nohjekim/Sprite%20at%20Gilmore_zpsooopgcdd.jpg I originally restored it in 1980, and it was re restored over the last two years to it's present state. It's one of the best in the country now, and has won many awards. The car is now in the care of my Nephew Rob. Mike
Hi Mr. Kingsbury. Thanks so much for the history lessons. 1 question. The 1st thing I noticed with this 68 GT500, was the right front fender had a different blue hue than the door. And a close up shot showed the door and fender were out of alignment as were the stripes. Hmmm. Any explanations? lol. I'm 59 now and sooo lucky my dad and his brother and brothers in law were fanatics about these cars. I got to experience these monsters 1st hand. Today, I own a 69 Roadrunner,69 Cobra fastback, 09 GT500, and 2013 Challenger R/T Classic. All standard shift. jwedgerlyjr@gmail.com John
The truth is that I don't remember noticing that. But many of the cars we got were loaned to multiple people for evaluation so it's not impossible that it had been repaired before we received it. I know that several of them needed to be repaired after we tested them. LOL Including a 429 Torino that left engine parts spread for a half mile down the track.
In some of the videos of automatic equipped cars , it seems like they neutral dropped em. You hear it rev , you see the shifter get put in drive and then tire smoke. Haha did they actually do that , or was it just editing ?
Can subtract about 1.5 seconds from a 0-60 to equate for modern tyres. These cars came with 215-235 width bias plys, terrible for launching grip and in these tests they stand on the throttle not roll into it
a very HONEST assesment of a standard NON RINGER CAR.........most of the test done back then were in specially prepped factory cars........or the Magazines just used performance numbers given to them from the factory
@@tymac3306 The 428cj was criminally underrated though, it was rated at 335hp at some contrived RPM like 3000 or something to keep insurance rates down, these engines have been dyno proven to produce around 410hp at their actual peak RPM though.
@@richsackett3423 Yes but did you read the entirety of my comment? Ford ''and others'' purposefully underrated the 428 to keep the cost of insuring the car down because in those day insurance premiums were directly related to output of the vehicle. And also, a modern car of similar size and weight with modern tires and 400hp would do 0-60 faster than this yes, but good luck funneling that much power/torque to the pavement with the skinny little rock hard bias ply tires these cars used. This car likely could have done this measure at least a full second faster with a set of modern radials and no form of electronic traction control, and you can probably take another 1/3 of a second off or so when you factor in this cars old long throw manual transmission vs something like a modern day 10-Speed automatic. There's is a LOT more factors at play here than just engine output.
Somebody here called this car a slug??, and their family car would beat.? Your family car would run with it or maybe barely beat it. Honda Oddyses 2020 model is just doing 14.5 sec in the quarter mile "55" years later. Performance cars today with 500-700 plus horsepower are basically race cars. This biggest difference today is better gas mile. Respect the past.
Put those old style skinny bias ply tires on a modern car and see how well they handle. Modern tires make more of a difference to how a car performs than most people can imagine.
I first drove one of these in 1968. It was the same blue but was the convertible. It was one of the first cars I ever drove on a racetrack. It was a automatic with a 3.00 rear end and it ran 14.10 at 102 miles per hour as it came from Ford. It needed more gearing for drag racing as I could almost run the full 1/4 mile in 2nd gear. I was only 17 at the time so it was a big thrill to drive something like that. I eventually became a NHRA license Pro Stock racer but never forgot where it all started in that Shelby GT500 KR convertible.
Interesting reviews, also checked out the one of the AMX which with a bit smaller engine is just as fast as the Shelby but brakes are considerably better on the AMX.
Lol, that's due to tires and gearing. That car would rape new v6 mustang's and Camaro from a 2nd or 3rd gear roll. Maybe 2010 era and up would pull it, but 0-60 times and largely even 1/4 times dont mean jack from this era due to traction from the line. And it would be boatloads more enjoyment from the drivers seat..
I agree with you guys. I will share my first hand experience on this. I own both a 2020 V6 Colorado and a 1970 400 LeMans. Both are rated at north of 300 hp with the Lemans being rated at around 20 hp and 100 ft/lb of torque higher and having a 500 pound weight advantage over the truck. I think the truck is geared way better and the 8 speed auto makes it so the engine is always in the power band where the LeMans is a 4 speed manual and basically gets no traction off the line. 0 - 60 and quarter mile times would not even be close. A set of slicks may help. They would be pretty close at a mid speed pull but I still think the Colorado would come out on top. Keep in mind, the power ratings were done differently back then compared to how they are done now so the V6 actually makes more power than the big V8. The old car wins the cool factor for sure but as far as joy to drive, it's a toss up. Those older cars are a handful to drive.
I invite anyone, here in 2022, to go to their local drag strip and walk the starting line. The modern track is coated with so much stickum that you can barely lift up your feet. I also ran the tracks back in the '60s and '70s and the starting line at places like Atco and Englishtown Raceway Park were the same as your driveway at home back then. So if you're doing today's timing runs at the track, the track surface will give you some great numbers. These old hot rods were beasts!
True story Short version of a real story My father bought a Shelby 68 428 kr as a demo in Miami Florida he loved the car The fiber glass hood was stolen two times while he owned it. He started a family and literally let the car go to the insurance company for reasons I don’t understand to this day. I think he you paid about $4500
I love these videos...thanx for the upload Mr. Doe....re: the '68 Shelby's...in case some people aren't aware, the '68 - '70 Shelby Mustangs were "Shelby" in name only...they were produced right on the Ford production lines along with the other Mustangs...they are Fords not Shelby's...at that point Ford was just paying Shelby to use his name, which doesn't make them a bad car, but they weren't really "Shelby's".
Yup, exactly like you said. The last thing that shelby did himself to a mustang was puting the 428 big blocks in the 67 gt500 and gave'em a double 4bbl. But even the styling was already done by Ford on those cars
@Harry. B. Renner. jr. Yes he was getting paid so he "endorsed" them. When Ford told him they were moving the production to Detroit in '68 Shelby said Okay but don't use my name or the cobra on them...Ford pretty much told him we will and we are using both names.
The tires were the real problem for these cars, tire technology wasn't up to challenge at the time, and the horsepower wars were in full swing by 68. A set of modern radials on one of these cars would significantly improve its performance.
@@Greatdome99 Yes, axle wind-up was common. A set of traction bars would solve that. I'm surprised that Ford didn't have some kind of traction bar system for the Mustang.
Times have changed, my 2004 Honda Accord, V6 6 speed MT coupe would do 0 to 60 in just over 5 seconds. And it would accelerate to 100 in the quarter mile. Now my Honda CRV will do 0 to 60 in just over 8 second with a 1500 CC engine. Now they are producing street cars that will do it in under 4 seconds. I road in a Tesla, it's like taking off in a rocket.
I had two 67 Shelby GT 500's the first a 428 C6 and the second had a dealer installed 427 side oiler with the Top loader. With dual quad Holleys they sucked gas up and with a 16 or 18 gallon gas tank. One did not have much range. Shelby stole the KR moniker from Chevrolet who was going to use that on their big block 68 Corvette.
Yes a set a modern radials would help this car launch immensely, but these skinny little bias ply's were the best they had bad then, radials wouldn't become the norm on cars until the early 1980's a little over a decade after this was filmed.
Wow Michael Kingsbury your so lucky to drive a 68 GT500. I find it funny ( - : how u said know I drive a Honda lol Im only 13 years old but even I know that a Honda dose not even come close to old school Mustangs.
The truth is that my Honda V6 MT (manual 6-speed transmission) coupe was faster than the Mustang. My Honda world go from 0 to 60 in just over 5 seconds and 100 in the quarter in 14 seconds and had a top speed of over 140 mph. All on only 250 hp. On the track, the Honda would be a long way ahead at the end of a lap, the handling was really fantastic and flat in the corners. That's how much technology has changed over the years.
Cars have improved so much that it's amazing. My Honda V6 six-speed coupe would blow the doors off of the Mustang. Especially on the track. But even in a straight-line drag race. We would have thought 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds was like a Ferrari back then. Now it isn't uncommon to get into the 3s.
Why did automotive journalists quit doing reverse spins? I realize it is impossible in the current market what with stability control being standard equipment on most vehicles. But from the mid 80s until the early 2010s it seems like it could have been totally do able
@@hotrodray6802 That's the one. Good way to escape from bad guys. I found these clips that someone put together. th-cam.com/video/5X7XGmS6Pe4/w-d-xo.html
Lets be honest, the reverse spin was a bullshit test and just an excuse to drive the piss out of these cars lol, unless you're a getaway driver you have no need for a reverse spin on your daily commute to work.
Hahaha you're a dummy aren't you...no way a Camry would beat this car with modern tires....this car with 10" slicks would run a low 13 high 12 sec. 1/4
@@bilbobaggins4710 they run the 1/4 right at the same time. and the funny thing is, both the gt500 back then and the 2020 camry are having problems smoking the tire during acceleration runs...so can we put slicks on both then? to keep it "fair" Of course I would rather have the classic gt500 than a camry...but as a whole package, that camry will run circles around that gt500 for its whole 250k mile plus life at basically all driving disciplines. funny times
Ford just couldn't come to grips with the idea that stiff springs and large front and rear sway bars would benefit a cars ability to take curves and handle smoothly.
They all sucked at handling and braking back then. It was like shooting pool with a wet noodle. 😂 Absolutely terrible compared to anything now days. Hell a big old late model Suburban or Expedition could waste about any muscle car in the curves other than maybe the Trans am series SCCA cars. Like the Z28 , Boss 302, Cuda and AMX for instance.
This is close to the one Jim had, but his was a 1967 model the best looking year for Shelby Mustangs in my opinion. Its to bad he wrecked it into a light pole, He was really hard on it as material things held little value to him, I've heard accounts from people who knew him at the time that said he drove it like a maniac and would regularly go 100mph+ down Mulholland Drive.
The old one wheel peel on the drift. 0-60 6 sec,....hard to believe today a base VW golf will do it in 7 sec, and the mustangs of today as low as 3.5 sec to 60
General Motors almost had the logo of "KR" when Carroll Shelby found out about it. He called his Attorney to see if if had been patten yet. When he found out it had not, he gave his attorney until close of day to get it patten or he would be out of a job. General Motors wanted the "KR" LOGO for their Corvettes. The rest is history.
Probably pooped it into neutral right before the spin, but even if they didn't they probably didn't give to much of a shit, these press cars released for testing purposes, so they were regularly getting the crap beat out of them.
David H. Re-read the title statement by matrox. I will add another little ditty: bias ply tires of the era weren’t exactly top of the line. “Spinning ain’t winning” is the mantra here.
360hp 😂 yeah ok just like the 429 CJ those numbers weren't even close to real Ford would just run them to a certain RPM with a very mild timing number and advertise the numbers it wasn't the peak numbers where this is very clear the 390s were rated similar numbers as certain 428s depending on year and vehicle the 390 was a dog vs the 427 428 and 429 the 429 SCJ was the best 3.59 inch stroke just hair longer than a 351 so the bore was huge you could rev the shit of them the bottom end was over built also had a oil cooler to help the 430 gear beating on it, the 429 SCJ should have been used more the heads were capable of big power put big headers and big carb add some timing and boom 500hp
“Advertised” 360 horsepower………never understood why in 1968 you would advertise less than your competitors. The 425 hp 426 hemi was advertised no problem.
Haha the hemi was rated by Chrysler at 470hp then marketed at 425hp.. everyone under rated hp because of insurance companies being scared of high powered race engines going in full size cars with drum brakes and bias ply tyres
The 428CJ was extremely underrated, its been proven on a modern dyno that these engines actually made around 410hp in their factory form, It was underrated for insurance purposes, I mean who the hell measures peak out at 3000RPM in anything other than a diesel. On the topic of Chrysler, they weren't the kings of power like some people seem to falsely remember, where Chrysler's 426 hemi was rated at 426hp GM's 454LX was rated 450hp and Fords 429 Boss was making closer to 500 in the real world, it too was sandbagged by Ford at 375hp at like 2800rpm for insurance reasons.
gotta love the tin can garbage under the hood, especially the HI-C juice can used for a reservoir and the dinty moore beef stew can on the inner fender. Oh, lets not forget the hideous steering wheel.
The 69 Mach 1 had beefier suspension than a base model. The standard engine was a 351 vs. six cylinder for the base. If a buyer ordered the 428 Cobra-Jet with ram air, the hood scoop was functional.
That's not far off and could be traction issues. Traction-LOK wasn't available with big block Fords until very late in the 1968 model year and didn't really become a production standard until the 1969 model year. Shelby did install a Detroit locker in SOME cars, but they weren't that common. Late 1968 - 1969 was also the beginning of higher production of lower rear end gear ratios, so the 1969 may have lower gears than the 1968. In the late 1960's Shelby did fewer and fewer modifications to the running gear.
Hi
I just found this, I'm the driver of the car in the video.
I drove the cars for Bud for several years when his son was in the service.
His offices were in the same building as the advertising agency that I worked for as a graphic designer, and photographer.
Bud did filming for some TV commercials for us.
He was friends with my boss and he asked if I could get off from work on Fridays to drive the cars for him.
I was a SCCA racer at the time so I was qualified to do the job.
I also got to go along as a still photographer to places like Indy and Mid Ohio where I got to meet people like Paul Newman, Mario Andretti, Al Unser etc.
I still think those days, what a blast.
I'm 78 now but I still drive a hot Honda Accord 6 speed coupe that will do 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds.
Mike
Were you the only driver on these? We dont get a good look at this driver but the later videos show a consistent driver.
Is this you driving in this Oldsmobile video? th-cam.com/video/HdDlHZsE7TY/w-d-xo.html
Hi
I was the driver for a couple of years, probably 1969 and 1970.
This was while Buds son Dave was in the service.
When Dave got out he took over the driving again.
In one instance he flipped a DeTomaso Pantera onto its roof!
I had several failures a 428 Ford Torino blew it's engine when I was flat out down the straight at Grattan Raceway.
A Ford, a Galaxie had the front wheel collapse while going through a turn, I almost ran over Bud who was filming from the edge of the track.
I later shared an office building with Car and Track Productions, when I started my own graphic design business and he gave me connections to many automotive clients that we had. Bud know everyone and filmed for NASCAR and even Paul Newman.
I got to meet a lot of interesting people through Bud.
Sadly Bud died when he was only 58, and his son Dave took over the business, but he too died young at only 50 and Car and Track ended.
Mike
Thanks for the info. I was looking for the drivers in these videos or anybody with info on these. How did Dave die?
Then you may have been driving this Dart Swinger when it lost control in a curve as seen in this video. th-cam.com/video/JNxY3XEXC2k/w-d-xo.html
I wish the reverse spin was still common test car criteria. Would love to see Consumer Reports try that on a RAV4.
Or the Exploder!!!
The AWD system would shit itself lol
Lol! That RAV4 would tumble end over end in a reverse spin! All of the SUVs and crossovers are top heavy with short wheelbases.
Bud Linedemann does great narration. he must have been involved with the Turbo Encabulator Project.
I never knew Bud recorded these in our downstairs living room beside the fireplace back in rhe day.
"the gas gauge required constant checking, this car was thirsty ... ALL the time"!
Back then one would say;
"hell yeah it's fast, it'll pass anything... except a gas station"
No problem then. Gas was like 40 cents a gallon. 😂
@@markball7028
I remember 51 cents a gallon, and that was full service.
Back then you had to be adept at the math, because the pump readout didn't include the tax, so you did it in your head and stopped short, to keep it an even 5 bucks etc.
Yeah back then who gave fiddlers. Gas was only about $.32 a gallon for premium. And that was for 104 octane
Very good trap speed for the 14.5 sec time, but the tires back then could not handle that amount of torque. With modern tires it would run in the 13's easily.
Yeah the tires really were the Achilles heal of these old muscle cars, no way skinny little bias ply's were gonna stand up to 400+ ft/lb's of torque.
A bit of trivia : Oprah ran a 13.22 on B.F. Goodrich's in '68 She wore pigskin driving gloves and Converse shoes. She skipped wearing a helmet to save weight/time.
@Landre Wilkinson Oprah
@@death2pc Bit of trivia: Trump's headed to prison.
@@richsackett3423 when is that happening? Wager on that? TDS is a helluva drug
Sure would like to see that GT500KR with a 4spd & set of 3:91 gears!!
Konis and a 22mm swaybar!!!
Occasionally I don't do the "reverse spin" on the way to work. Those are my least productive days.
So glad I found these vids. Mr. Kingsbury you drive among the gods!
It’s impressive for an automatic back then, tons of loss and still haulin’ ass
That drift at the end was crazy. Smoke boiling off of the rear tires in second gear...... Monster torque down low where it counts on these engines.
Those body panels not lining up make me laugh but that's it was back then. I love it.
150-K Car today .
Thanks for sharing info. Most excellent videos. I started driving in 1983 and drove similar models as "used" cars. Not far from home was some rural roads with turns and elevation changes :P None of my cars accelerated/braked/handled particularly well, which is why they where fun to drive. I quickly learned that shocks and anti-sway arm bushings don't last the life of the car. Chris
"Hey, it's happy time!"
I said the same thing. 👍
Best line in Bud Linderman Car review. “The Gas Gauge required constant checking!!! It’s Thirsty All The Time!!!” I would say the 428, 4 barrel is the exciting cause for that gas mileage.👍🏼💨
Im glad Im not the only one that got a chuckle out of that line!
The problem with the '68 Shelby (and regular Mustang) is the puny 16-gallon gas tank. A 428 driven hard is probably getting 6-7 mpg, so that tank runs dry pretty quickly!
@@davekunz6359 Yes! It's funny that Ford installed small tanks in everything except full size LTDs
I got a ride in a red 4 speed back in 69. What a cool car!
Hi
It took some digging but I found the picture of Bud and I with the same car that's in the video.
i1238.photobucket.com/albums/ff491/nohjekim/Mike%20and%20Bud%20filming%20Car%20amp%20Track%20segment_zps6tzoi2yx.jpg
In the for what it's worth department, my Austin Healey Sprite, that was my race car is in the Gilmore Automobile Museum on display for 6 months.
i1238.photobucket.com/albums/ff491/nohjekim/Sprite%20at%20Gilmore_zpsooopgcdd.jpg
I originally restored it in 1980, and it was re restored over the last two years to it's present state. It's one of the best in the country now, and has won many awards.
The car is now in the care of my Nephew Rob.
Mike
Hi Mr. Kingsbury. Thanks so much for the history lessons. 1 question. The 1st thing I noticed with this 68 GT500, was the right front fender had a different blue hue than the door. And a close up shot showed the door and fender were out of alignment as were the stripes. Hmmm. Any explanations? lol. I'm 59 now and sooo lucky my dad and his brother and brothers in law were fanatics about these cars. I got to experience these monsters 1st hand. Today, I own a 69 Roadrunner,69 Cobra fastback, 09 GT500, and 2013 Challenger R/T Classic. All standard shift. jwedgerlyjr@gmail.com John
The truth is that I don't remember noticing that.
But many of the cars we got were loaned to multiple people for evaluation so it's not impossible that it had been repaired before we received it.
I know that several of them needed to be repaired after we tested them. LOL
Including a 429 Torino that left engine parts spread for a half mile down the track.
In some of the videos of automatic equipped cars , it seems like they neutral dropped em.
You hear it rev , you see the shifter get put in drive and then tire smoke.
Haha did they actually do that , or was it just editing ?
@@cobracharmer6178
Brake light was out in one of the braking tests too 😁
Thank you for your history! Great hearing the background on these cars and filming.
"Now the 69 Mach1 has adopted them"? " the bottom one is a falsey". Crack me up!
Cobra Charmer yeah,...he was trying to be cool,...lol the good oldays
I was 8 years old in 1968 when this commercial came out.
Watching these old car reviews is almost like meeting your hero. The numbers are always disappointing.
It is all about the tires they were like driving on 6” wide banana peels. Radial tires didn’t see much use until the 80’s they changed a lot.
Can subtract about 1.5 seconds from a 0-60 to equate for modern tyres. These cars came with 215-235 width bias plys, terrible for launching grip and in these tests they stand on the throttle not roll into it
a very HONEST assesment of a standard NON RINGER CAR.........most of the test done back then were in specially prepped factory cars........or the Magazines just used performance numbers given to them from the factory
Insane torque on the fangs of the Cobra
LouMan ya..what’s it 475? The hp is kinds crappy but it was the twisty power back then that they relied on.
@@tymac3306 The 428cj was criminally underrated though, it was rated at 335hp at some contrived RPM like 3000 or something to keep insurance rates down, these engines have been dyno proven to produce around 410hp at their actual peak RPM though.
@@nathanmcdonald610 A 6.2 0-60 doesn't reflect a car with over 400hp.
@@richsackett3423 Yes but did you read the entirety of my comment? Ford ''and others'' purposefully underrated the 428 to keep the cost of insuring the car down because in those day insurance premiums were directly related to output of the vehicle. And also, a modern car of similar size and weight with modern tires and 400hp would do 0-60 faster than this yes, but good luck funneling that much power/torque to the pavement with the skinny little rock hard bias ply tires these cars used. This car likely could have done this measure at least a full second faster with a set of modern radials and no form of electronic traction control, and you can probably take another 1/3 of a second off or so when you factor in this cars old long throw manual transmission vs something like a modern day 10-Speed automatic. There's is a LOT more factors at play here than just engine output.
@@nathanmcdonald610 Yeah I've known that for decades. Changes my comment none at all. Did you read the entirety of my comment?
I remember guys who owned 428 cj's said with slicks headers
And tune
They could get into the
12's
The right rear brake light also overheated and failed.
Nice quality back them, RR bbrake light not working on new car lol...4:46
Noticed that too lol sign of the times.
I’ve noticed this many times at Barrett Jackson. Supposedly better then new restorations, except for bulbs.
Somebody here called this car a slug??, and their family car would beat.? Your family car would run with it or maybe barely beat it. Honda Oddyses 2020 model is just doing 14.5 sec in the quarter mile "55" years later. Performance cars today with 500-700 plus horsepower are basically race cars. This biggest difference today is better gas mile. Respect the past.
Put those old style skinny bias ply tires on a modern car and see how well they handle. Modern tires make more of a difference to how a car performs than most people can imagine.
I first drove one of these in 1968. It was the same blue but was the convertible. It was one of the first cars I ever drove on a racetrack. It was a automatic with a 3.00 rear end and it ran 14.10 at 102 miles per hour as it came from Ford. It needed more gearing for drag racing as I could almost run the full 1/4 mile in 2nd gear. I was only 17 at the time so it was a big thrill to drive something like that. I eventually became a NHRA license Pro Stock racer but never forgot where it all started in that Shelby GT500 KR convertible.
I like that shot of the Shelby drifting in slow mo.
Interesting reviews, also checked out the one of the AMX which with a bit smaller engine is just as fast as the Shelby but brakes are considerably better on the AMX.
What's funny is these cars used to seem so fast. Now almost all of the V6 pickup trucks are faster to 60.
Because the new pickups have 6, 8 and 10 speed automatics...that makes a difference in acceleration.
Lol, that's due to tires and gearing. That car would rape new v6 mustang's and Camaro from a 2nd or 3rd gear roll. Maybe 2010 era and up would pull it, but 0-60 times and largely even 1/4 times dont mean jack from this era due to traction from the line. And it would be boatloads more enjoyment from the drivers seat..
I agree with you guys. I will share my first hand experience on this. I own both a 2020 V6 Colorado and a 1970 400 LeMans. Both are rated at north of 300 hp with the Lemans being rated at around 20 hp and 100 ft/lb of torque higher and having a 500 pound weight advantage over the truck. I think the truck is geared way better and the 8 speed auto makes it so the engine is always in the power band where the LeMans is a 4 speed manual and basically gets no traction off the line. 0 - 60 and quarter mile times would not even be close. A set of slicks may help. They would be pretty close at a mid speed pull but I still think the Colorado would come out on top. Keep in mind, the power ratings were done differently back then compared to how they are done now so the V6 actually makes more power than the big V8. The old car wins the cool factor for sure but as far as joy to drive, it's a toss up. Those older cars are a handful to drive.
I invite anyone, here in 2022, to go to their local drag strip and walk the starting line. The modern track is coated with so much stickum that you can barely lift up your feet. I also ran the tracks back in the '60s and '70s and the starting line at places like Atco and Englishtown Raceway Park were the same as your driveway at home back then. So if you're doing today's timing runs at the track, the track surface will give you some great numbers. These old hot rods were beasts!
Lovely car
True story
Short version of a real story
My father bought a Shelby 68 428 kr as a demo in Miami Florida he loved the car
The fiber glass hood was stolen two times while he owned it. He started a family and literally let the car go to the insurance company for reasons I don’t understand to this day.
I think he you paid about $4500
Me personally I would rather have a 681/2, Mustang Super Cobra Jet, more rare and less conspicuous!
Love this car!
Gotta love the 60s and there impressive reverse spin test lol
I love these videos...thanx for the upload Mr. Doe....re: the '68 Shelby's...in case some people aren't aware, the '68 - '70 Shelby Mustangs were "Shelby" in name only...they were produced right on the Ford production lines along with the other Mustangs...they are Fords not Shelby's...at that point Ford was just paying Shelby to use his name, which doesn't make them a bad car, but they weren't really "Shelby's".
Yup, exactly like you said.
The last thing that shelby did himself to a mustang was puting the 428 big blocks in the 67 gt500 and gave'em a double 4bbl. But even the styling was already done by Ford on those cars
@Harry. B. Renner. jr. Yes he was getting paid so he "endorsed" them. When Ford told him they were moving the production to Detroit in '68 Shelby said Okay but don't use my name or the cobra on them...Ford pretty much told him we will and we are using both names.
Man, 0-60mph in 6.2 seconds is phenomenal for the time!
The tires were the real problem for these cars, tire technology wasn't up to challenge at the time, and the horsepower wars were in full swing by 68. A set of modern radials on one of these cars would significantly improve its performance.
Yeah, and if you listen carefully, you can hear the axle hop from the leaf springs.
@@Greatdome99 Yes, axle wind-up was common. A set of traction bars would solve that. I'm surprised that Ford didn't have some kind of traction bar system for the Mustang.
Times have changed, my 2004 Honda Accord, V6 6 speed MT coupe would do 0 to 60 in just over 5 seconds. And it would accelerate to 100 in the quarter mile. Now my Honda CRV will do 0 to 60 in just over 8 second with a 1500 CC engine.
Now they are producing street cars that will do it in under 4 seconds.
I road in a Tesla, it's like taking off in a rocket.
Ah yes and at 4:46 the right break light went out before the gas did! But love the presentation 👌 tho.
top car bro and like put
I had two 67 Shelby GT 500's the first a 428 C6 and the second had a dealer installed 427 side oiler with the Top loader. With dual quad Holleys they sucked gas up and with a 16 or 18 gallon gas tank. One did not have much range. Shelby stole the KR moniker from Chevrolet who was going to use that on their big block 68 Corvette.
It's running out of brake light fluid.
A common problem! People just don't keep the level up!
Im no mechanic.But wouldn't some more modern grippier tires knock off a couple of seconds in 0-60?Looks like it spun that long until it launch.
Youd probably knock an entire second off that with slicks and a clutch dump that hooked. 5.0-5.2 range
Yes a set a modern radials would help this car launch immensely, but these skinny little bias ply's were the best they had bad then, radials wouldn't become the norm on cars until the early 1980's a little over a decade after this was filmed.
Wow Michael Kingsbury your so lucky to drive a 68 GT500. I find it funny ( - : how u said know I drive a Honda lol Im only 13 years old but even I know that a Honda dose not even come close to old school Mustangs.
The truth is that my Honda V6 MT (manual 6-speed transmission) coupe was faster than the Mustang.
My Honda world go from 0 to 60 in just over 5 seconds and 100 in the quarter in 14 seconds and had a top speed of over 140 mph. All on only 250 hp.
On the track, the Honda would be a long way ahead at the end of a lap, the handling was really fantastic and flat in the corners.
That's how much technology has changed over the years.
Cars have improved so much that it's amazing.
My Honda V6 six-speed coupe would blow the doors off of the Mustang. Especially on the track. But even in a straight-line drag race. We would have thought 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds was like a Ferrari back then.
Now it isn't uncommon to get into the 3s.
B20 with a tune easy gap. Lightweight
Why did automotive journalists quit doing reverse spins? I realize it is impossible in the current market what with stability control being standard equipment on most vehicles. But from the mid 80s until the early 2010s it seems like it could have been totally do able
Probably because Mannix is the only person who ever needed to do a reverse spin.
you got so much assist shit now,you will have more fun riding a bicycle
Private eye
You mean Jim Rockford, (James Garnet) ??
@@hotrodray6802 That's the one. Good way to escape from bad guys. I found these clips that someone put together. th-cam.com/video/5X7XGmS6Pe4/w-d-xo.html
Lets be honest, the reverse spin was a bullshit test and just an excuse to drive the piss out of these cars lol, unless you're a getaway driver you have no need for a reverse spin on your daily commute to work.
The music at the end reminds me of Super Bowl III..
Hey it's Happy Time! What an amazing car it would have been in its day!
What stuntman mike, lol :)
Just waiting for a hubcap to come flying off.
lol
3:25 those are speed holes. they make the car go faster.
This looks like the Grattan, Michigan race track
I wonder where this car is today.
Holding beans together in a sort of a can shape
Hopefully getting resprayed because passenger side front fender didn't match rest of the car!
Fast forward 52 years, and a Camry is faster. Those numbers were fast back in the day.
Hahaha you're a dummy aren't you...no way a Camry would beat this car with modern tires....this car with 10" slicks would run a low 13 high 12 sec. 1/4
Whats the torque of a current Camry??? 220ftlbs tops???? Please explain how it will out run this car with over 450ft.lbs
@@bilbobaggins4710 they run the 1/4 right at the same time. and the funny thing is, both the gt500 back then and the 2020 camry are having problems smoking the tire during acceleration runs...so can we put slicks on both then? to keep it "fair" Of course I would rather have the classic gt500 than a camry...but as a whole package, that camry will run circles around that gt500 for its whole 250k mile plus life at basically all driving disciplines. funny times
@@bilbobaggins4710 Because...they are grounded to the ground. That's how.
@@patriley5333 you're slow aren't you
bet it would be in the mid 13-s with grippy rear tires.
Ford just couldn't come to grips with the idea that stiff springs and large front and rear sway bars would benefit a cars ability to take curves and handle smoothly.
They all sucked at handling and braking back then. It was like shooting pool with a wet noodle. 😂 Absolutely terrible compared to anything now days. Hell a big old late model Suburban or Expedition could waste about any muscle car in the curves other than maybe the Trans am series SCCA cars. Like the Z28 , Boss 302, Cuda and AMX for instance.
Rip to that right rear tire
The kr was a luxury stang.
Jim Morrison had one just like the car in the video
Everetttango1 He should have stayed home driving instead of going off to France......
This is close to the one Jim had, but his was a 1967 model the best looking year for Shelby Mustangs in my opinion. Its to bad he wrecked it into a light pole, He was really hard on it as material things held little value to him, I've heard accounts from people who knew him at the time that said he drove it like a maniac and would regularly go 100mph+ down Mulholland Drive.
I love when he says body roll was good. It was TERRIBLE! Times have changed.
You can only do so much with the tires of the day.
The old one wheel peel on the drift. 0-60 6 sec,....hard to believe today a base VW golf will do it in 7 sec, and the mustangs of today as low as 3.5 sec to 60
You obviously dont race lol. Tires, brother. Tires.
All in the tyres dude, a modern set of even 235 width (small by todays standards) would see atleast a second off the 6.2 0-60 time
Trailers for sale or rent, rooms to let, fifty cents
I'm a man of means by no means, king of the road
Someone bring back Speedvision !!
Back in the day...replace those e70s with g60s
460 ft lbs of torque at 3,200 Rpms.. holy crap .. might be too much for a daily driver ...lol
I worked for Jess and Joe Lindeman in the 1980s .........
Troll
Brake light malfunction - Already ( new ) Nice , but no auto trans .
No Limited slip? That inside rear tire is cooking up.
Optional extra
General Motors almost had the logo of "KR" when Carroll Shelby found out about it. He called his Attorney to see if if had been patten yet. When he found out it had not, he gave his attorney until close of day to get it patten or he would be out of a job.
General Motors wanted the "KR" LOGO for their Corvettes.
The rest is history.
Bullshit...or BS.
A Hotchkiss mention
How does that reverse spin test not roach the transmission?
Probably pooped it into neutral right before the spin, but even if they didn't they probably didn't give to much of a shit, these press cars released for testing purposes, so they were regularly getting the crap beat out of them.
@@nathanmcdonald610 You must be right Nathan. There must have been a timely shift into neutral followed by another timely shift into a forward gear.
The rear window is flat and visibility is limited, who cares ! Your in a Shelby ! Like Italian driving, what is behind does not matter!
Deborah chesser haha good point!
Almost as fast as the Jaguar he also tested.
Where's the spoke steering wheel?
The 67 had a better look with round lights
Even brand new from the factory, a tail light is out!!!
Lindemann sounds like he smoked Marlboro Reds and drank Jack Daniels Old No. 7 ..
So by today's standards one mean Camry!
steve lane yeah but WAY cooler than a g##damn Camry Stevo. Lolol
How did the Toyota's do back then?
Toy...who???
Another misinformed millennial 😆
Modern tyres will take off 1.5-2 seconds from the 0-60. The car was competitive, the tyres were not
The funny thing ? A new V6 mustang will out preform this car in any test. Crazy
Yea but that would be like comparing a teenager to a pensioner
Those cars lost anywhere from .5 to a whole second as they spun the wheels all through first gear.
a set of mr.gasket or lakewood traction bars strapped to the rear springs took the wheel hopping and tire spinning right out of that mustang.
matrox EXACTLY. Tell that to the millennials that say their Camry is faster, lol.
David H. Re-read the title statement by matrox. I will add another little ditty: bias ply tires of the era weren’t exactly top of the line. “Spinning ain’t winning” is the mantra here.
@@Lucille69caddy Also add a modern 6speed man. or 8 speed auto where the gears are close together. that would drop it another .5 sec at least.
3speed? automatic?
Welcome to 1960's car tech.
Notice the bug on the console at 3:21 ?
Same one that landed on VP Pence at the debate.
360hp 😂 yeah ok just like the 429 CJ those numbers weren't even close to real Ford would just run them to a certain RPM with a very mild timing number and advertise the numbers it wasn't the peak numbers where this is very clear the 390s were rated similar numbers as certain 428s depending on year and vehicle the 390 was a dog vs the 427 428 and 429 the 429 SCJ was the best 3.59 inch stroke just hair longer than a 351 so the bore was huge you could rev the shit of them the bottom end was over built also had a oil cooler to help the 430 gear beating on it, the 429 SCJ should have been used more the heads were capable of big power put big headers and big carb add some timing and boom 500hp
@ 2:43 😅 if that’s not the biggest paid off line of shit!
20 years later, the mustang did these et's with a 302.
Prefer the 427 one
To bad they only made like one of those for testing purposes.
Me want one...
I’ll take two please
And like all cougars and shelby's the right brake light is out 🤣
Right tail light not working haha
0-60 time was nearly identical to that of the AMC AMX 390. Between the two, the AMX was the superior car according to these tests.
AMX was a better looking car, just my opinion.
Hey it's happy time 😎 lol
That cracked me up. Went well with the "look Mom, real louvers!" silliness.
Shows you how far we ve come. My cummins turbo diesel would beat it.
The Shelby would have you in its rear view mirror as soon as it pulled 1st gear.
Michael Cuff BS
Lol Wouldn't go that far
Jeremy Thompson Ive done it! Germy!
Sure it would man, keep dreaming.
4:47 the right tail light is already failing? Come on ford. Failing On Recent Delivery. Haha
Lol.
too many lot attendants doing wheel hopping burnouts
That’s OK, I’ll be more than happy to take it, light out and all.
Those old muscles cars really were crap. Crap in corners and crap at stopping. I love them tho'
“Advertised” 360 horsepower………never understood why in 1968 you would advertise less than your competitors. The 425 hp 426 hemi was advertised no problem.
Haha the hemi was rated by Chrysler at 470hp then marketed at 425hp.. everyone under rated hp because of insurance companies being scared of high powered race engines going in full size cars with drum brakes and bias ply tyres
Dork strearing wheel, same as in the station wagon
HP for babies in comparison to what Chrysler was putting out.
The 428CJ was extremely underrated, its been proven on a modern dyno that these engines actually made around 410hp in their factory form, It was underrated for insurance purposes, I mean who the hell measures peak out at 3000RPM in anything other than a diesel. On the topic of Chrysler, they weren't the kings of power like some people seem to falsely remember, where Chrysler's 426 hemi was rated at 426hp GM's 454LX was rated 450hp and Fords 429 Boss was making closer to 500 in the real world, it too was sandbagged by Ford at 375hp at like 2800rpm for insurance reasons.
gotta love the tin can garbage under the hood, especially the HI-C juice can used for a reservoir and the dinty moore beef stew can on the inner fender. Oh, lets not forget the hideous steering wheel.
“Body roll is not excessive” as the body rolls excessively... So glad its 2020!
0-60: '69 Mustang 428 335 HP so slow they wouldn't give the numbers, '69 Mach 1 same engine 5.9 sec., '68 GT 500 428 360 HP 6.2 sec...
Has quicker 0-60mph than the other muscle cars that was tested.
Mach 1 is just a cheesy appearance package, stripes and fake hood scoop.
So if the Mach 1 goes 0-60 in 5.9 then the base model will.
The 69 Mach 1 had beefier suspension than a base model. The standard engine was a 351 vs. six cylinder for the base. If a buyer ordered the 428 Cobra-Jet with ram air, the hood scoop was functional.
That's not far off and could be traction issues.
Traction-LOK wasn't available with big block Fords until very late in the 1968 model year and didn't really become a production standard until the 1969 model year.
Shelby did install a Detroit locker in SOME cars, but they weren't that common.
Late 1968 - 1969 was also the beginning of higher production of lower rear end gear ratios, so the 1969 may have lower gears than the 1968.
In the late 1960's Shelby did fewer and fewer modifications to the running gear.
This 1968 looks like it has an air pump, so it might have California emissions.
Bald spots