The 8 Quickest Muscle Cars Of 1964
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- The 8 Fastest Muscle Cars of 1964 Based on Their Quarter Mile Times!
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
WATCH MORE OF MY CAR VIDEOS :
1. • Top 20 ULTRA-RARE SUPE...
2. • TOP 15 FASTEST ELECTRI...
3. • Top 20 Most Powerful N...
4. • TOP 20 MOST EXPENSIVE ...
5. • TOP 20 FASTEST SUVs OF...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
By creatively transforming the clips from other videos, this work qualifies as fair use and complies with U.S. copyright law without causing any harm to the original work's market value.
COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER:
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
▬▬▬▬▬▬
Thanks for watching!
#PDEvolution
![BUDGET BRAWLERS: [10] Stealthiest Sleeper Muscle Cars of All time](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TmKX-HtxD_o/mqdefault.jpg)
why does a 426s plymouth run 15.2 while a dodge polara with the same motor run 13.7? a gto at 13.1? Bobcat maybe. but not stock, the thunderbolt was not a street car so it shouldn't be on this list. that's like a plymouth max wedge or hemi for 64. what about the chevy 409? fuelie corvette? this is full of errors
64' Fury also came with 426 Hemi..........02c (special order)
I had a 1964 Polara 500 with the 426 Street Wedge in high school in the 1970's. The Dodge was longer and heavier than the Plymouth. Some magazine test cars were "tuned" by the factory and some were off of the lot. Note that these two cars were tested by two different magazines. Sometimes they even got gear ratios and other mods that weren't even factory options.The 1964 421 Catalina was faster in the quarter mile than the 1964 389 GTO, but Pontiac didn't want people to know that and may have slipped a 421 into their GTO test car.
It's the way the cars were "tested"... look at the tires on them too
@@BrandonLeeBrown ..Tuned is adjusting the timing not modifying the car..People/magazine testers dont know anything and some adjusted the timing and made them slower!
Also remember skinny 185/75 series bias ply tires that had no traction and tracks back then were not prepped like in the late 90's to today..Even the 1980's tracks were like a parking lot or road,not prepped thus slows cars off 103 seconds 0-60 and 1/4 on some tests..Even so called slicks of the day were only 8 inch wide like a 225 radial tire and they didnt have good traction...
I always cringe at old road tests as all were way off...I owned/drove multiple original verified low mileage and even 130,000 plus mileage cars of the 60's and they always performed seconds quicker than the dolt magazine testers did..They even say in automatics to avoid tire spin we started in 2nd or eased on the pedal until 2nd gear,that makes sense and thats how they get the slow times! I ran my stock 68 Newport Custom 383 4bbl to a 13.86 back in 1985 when I was very young lol...Car was stock,loaded even had a/c power everything..I also had a 1968 Chrysler 300 with the 595 cfm holley 4bbl 350 hp non high performance 440 that was quicker than my Newport sadly never ran that one. My buddy ran 15 flat with a 383 2 barrel Chrysler...these cars are all heavier than the 64 Dodge/Plymouth and yet ran quicker the 440 was at least mid 13's for a non performance 440...In the 80's I beat Grand Nationals,5.0 Mustangs older muscle from Ford/GM ran on the bumber of my buddies 383 Super bee with 3.23 gears thats what my C bodies had..even the 2 barrel had 3.23...Tests were way off,like Hellcats today they cant hook and times are all slower than they should be.
@@MikeekiM-vh5se Some of the factory supplied test cars were heavily modified. The car magazines that were based closer to Detroit got much faster cars than those car magazines that were west coast based and their test times showed it. The 1966 Cyclone GT test car even stated it had a Detroit Lock and 4.11 gears. Neither one were factory options and the car was much faster than the1966 Fairlane GT. The Detroit supplied cars had completely blueprinted engines and other mods, while the dealer supplied cars were factory stock. Some tests did run drag slicks and had modified suspensions. Pontiac didn't want to the public to know that the 1964 Catalina 421 was faster than the 1964 389 GTO and they put out a ringer GTO as a test car. The 289 Mustang in stock form wasn't nearly as fast as the test car, even with 3.89 gears. In a lot of cars, just quickening the distributor advance made a huge difference, but they went beyond that.
If you have the Thunderbolt Fords on the list than you need to have the 426 Hemi cars on the list. Major oversight!
My late friend had a 442 with a Chevy LS6 454 . He said it would do the quarter in 11.2 seconds . His son has it . What a monster hot rod .
If it did, the LS6 was nowhere near stock, it wouldn't even come close to that in a '70 Chevelle which was a lighter car than the 442. Again, not stock anyway
Definitely not stock.. agreed.
Sounds more like an LS7 454 crate engine...
Thunderbolt was a flat-out drag car... not found on the street
Actually they were steet legal.
@@roymiller6964 I double checked, and you are correct sir. That said, I doubt that any were used as a daily driver :--)
@@NH1969GOAT I actually saw one in Oklahoma several years ago on the street. It was burgundy and had low mileage. It was a 4 speed car.
I actually knew someone who owned one and drove it on the street and still drives it to car shows.
One thing they all had in common was every thing in the engine compartment was where it was supposed to be. Not removing the wheel well to get to the battery was a nice feature.
My very first ride was being cradled in my mothers arms in the passenger seat of a 64' GTO. Dad had sold that car before my earliest memories, but he took me for rides in other fast stuff later in life. Good times!!!
This is a good video , there were 2 cars in this line-up that were not production cars but rather special order , the Thunderbolt and the Galaxie 427 Q code . Thank you for the video .
No '64 Ford, or any factory muscle car of any king would come near an 11 second 1/4 mile time..completely stock from the factory that is
Thunderbolt Fairlane 11.77
It is now well known that the Car and Driver '64 GTO test car had a 421, rather than a 389.
Where did you gather your info on the GTO?
@@johnhobson8886 Jim Wangers, the marketing director for Pontiac in the 60's, admitted to it in his book "Glory Days", back in the 1990s. He helped talk Car and Driver into doing a comparison test between the Pontiac GTO and the Ferrari GTO.
@gary9426 Thanks for that information Sir!
What happened to Chryslers max wedge super stock cars? They ran the 1/4 mile in the 11,s also and so did the Pontiac super stock package cars running the 421 super duty engine. Poor comparison here with leaving them out and only mentioning the t-bolt.
When I was growing up in Conn there was local street racing thing going on. Even though it was a '65 it was the same as a 64, a Belvedere 426 wedge. He said GTO's were his bread and butter. He won the New England championship in B Stock Auto. He ran in the low 12's. We had another guy in town who had a 13.5 compression ratio Max Wedge. Nobody would race him. The only problem with it was that it wouldn't crank over in the winter on really cold morning. Pulling up next to him at a stop light you just knew it was bad ass between the exhaust rumble and the solid valve lifters talking. My Slant Six was no match.😂
What about the 1964 Plymouth Belvedere with the 426ci Hemi?
Were Hemi's even made then? Could it be a 426 Wedge? Just asking as I've got limited knowledge on stuff that old.
@@briansauer6695
Chrysler developed its first experimental hemi engine for the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt fighter aircraft in WWII. They put the 331ci Hemi in their early 50s cars. Their game changer 426ci Hemi was introduced beginning in 1964. The 426 Hemi was banned from NASCAR when Plymouth started winning every race. Big Daddy Don Garlits brought the Hemi to drag racing around that time, and today all NHRA high end racing uses the Hemi engine.
@@briansauer6695 I believe the Hemis were used in drag racing starting in '64 but were not available for the street until 1966.
Really? no Chevy 409? Motor Trend ran 14.09 @ 98.14 in their 1964 test. The Thunderbolt was a Drag Race only, not Street legal, let alone a Production Car.
Thunderbolts were street legal.
409-425HP
My dad had (he's since passed and my mom still has) a 64 R code 1964 Ford Custom, which is a stripped down bare basic no frills Galaxie. He bought it in 1969 from his brother and it was his drag car for years. He's said that his best ETs were 12.90s with open headers and 7" slicks....and that was as fast as he wanted to go.
It was common knowledge that Pontiac had slipped a 421 into the gto for faster drag strip times and produced more sales.
It worked! Took Chevelle SS sales until '70 to catch up to GTO sales...
13.1 seconds from a stock tri-power 64 gto? That C&D test used a cheater car, with a Roya Bobcat tuned 421, and setup with gears, and slicks.
no way a stock 64 GTO was running in the 13's....
Maybe a Pontiac Indian motor?
I was just 17 yrs. old and a Jr. in High School in 1971 when I bought my uncles, red w/white bucket interior, 1964 Olds 442. And it turned out to be a big hit with all the chicks hanging out at the Tasty Freeze..
did you get lucky?
The legendary R Code!
Gotta call B.S. on this video. Mustangs were not faster than Street Wedge cars, and why was the Max Wedge not even mentioned? Many facts and faster cars were left out.
Tommy James & The Shondells had a B-side titled "THUNDERBOLT" --- perfect musical score for #1
1964 Chevelle with a 327 that had 365 hp,plus two 4 bbl's and a cam,what are we talking?
What was the quarter mile time?
Because I know that engine could run like hell.
Nothing stock ran 11s in the 60s and power numbers were gross not net. So a 426 hemi, or a 427 ford or GM didn't even reach the 425 hp claims they were closer to roughly 330 to 365. Which explains the 14s or slower. Which back then 14s was really fast. That and 2 , 3 , 4 speed transmissions also held them back. The 1971 Corvette ZR-1 was one of the first American cars to be rated net ho and at an actual 378hp net (375 adv.) it ran almost 13.2s easily making it one of the fastest for it's day despite being a small block
You are correct,,,,back in the 70s my modified 1971 Duster that turned in the mid to high 13s smoked many a so called high performance big block car on the street and strip.
Truth to tell, Nick Panarits {Nicks Garage on you tube} dynoed a stock 426 Hemi and got nearly 500 hp
Tire technology coudn't handle the power most of these had. I remember seeing them smoke tires halfway thru 2nd gear and beyond!
The Pontiac Grand Prix was the adults version of the GTO
Back in the mid sixties, no one in my crowd would be caught in a Polara or even any Pontiac but a GTO. I did love my '63 Galaxie 500XL with a 406 Tri Power as well as my '64 Fury. The Ford, while for all intent was "officially" stock, had the '64 "K" cam and lightened lifters and the distributor set up with 427 internals and Sun bench adjusted to the 427 specs. Best time before the cam change was in the low 14s then afterwards, 13.22 and 105. There was a Thunderbolts locally street driven - impressive car and rattled windows. My Fury - sob! Bought as a family car with a 318. Gutless but 20mpg which helped my pretty puny paycheck at the time. My guess is that my current F150 w/ 400Hp 3.5 would run pretty close to most of those sixties cars but for sure doesn't have the style points of that era
would love to have that 63 Galaxie! I liked its styling better than the 64s
Ah good old days with unappreciated marvels, but I trip on the 1960 Dodge Polara 5:50 :)
a 1960 Polara. I bought a White 2dr Matador. Ended up with a1961 golden loin out of a New Yorker. Loved that car same body and find as the Polara. The 413 woke up the Matador..
Catalina the GTOs big bad Brother!!
Ah ! My teenage years ❤
GM considers the corvette a sports car. So do most car publications and other car manufacturers. Sports cars are two door two seaters. Made for high speed courses. While muscle cars are straight line. There’s more to the answer. But that’s a brief summary.
A 1964 Corvette with fuel injection was putting out 375 hp at a lower weight than many of these cars
so you dont consider a corvette a muscle car, video title should be "8 quickest muscle cars of 1964 but corvettes don't count"
It’s a sports car 😄
Sports car.
It was a muscle car in 1962
The Vettes are considered sports cars and not muscle cars. I’ve had three of them. And currently own a 71. Right or wrong they classify them differently
There are 2 person sports cars, full size cars, 4 - 6 person mid size muscle cars, and 2 - 4 or more person pony cars...
409???
Erroneous😂
The 1964 Pontiac lemans had a 326 engine also
In my lifetime I've owned over two hundred cars and all makes and models. I'm not sure what my favorite one is but I'm going to say that I've been over 195mph in one. When I reached that speed and was fish tailing I let off of the gas. That's the fastest I've ever been and it was a foreign car. Of course I've been over a 140 here in America in a Shelby Cobra jet.
'63 Tempest had a 326 with actual 336"...
TEXASMUDNECK SAY TUNDER BOLTS WERE ON THE STREET!! I HAD
SEVERAL, FIXED TUNED AND SOLD
TURLY HYPO DRIVEING ONE TRUELY RXZELLIRATING
JUST REMEMBERING
MY HEART AND
ADDRENLAN
WOW😮😮😮😮😊😊😢😢😢
SOLD VERY QUICKLY 😢😢😢
So where are the supercharged Studebakers on your list? They're faster than anything on here besides the Thunderbolt. Besides that, the Pontiac GTO in Car & Driver which you reference is documented in the article as being a specially-built with higher compression, more ignition timing, different carburetor jetting, blocked heat risers, and rocker arms adjusted to zero lash. Never mind the rumors that it was actually a 421, not a 389.
Another to add: In 1998 I had a '92 Volkswagen Corrado SLC. I had a cold air intake and a chip on the engine, and I managed a 14.98 @ 93.25 quarter mile. When I did this, in the lane next to me was a stock '70 Corvette convertible with a manual transmission; I gapped this guy by two car lengths with a V6 front wheel drive hatchback import with minimal mods!
Then one night I was online in the chatrooms on AOL and this guy wanted to race my VR6 Corrado, so I showed. Turns out I knew him from a car club, but now he had an Acura Integra Type R; We met up and raced and I bobbled the launch, but by the quarter mile mark I was passing him. I have had Type R people argue with me about that, but the results are solid; Their four cylinders simply cannot break the 15 second barrier and my VR6 could. And that narrow V6 engine ate Chever-Lay V8's just as happily as it ate Honda four cylinders!
'92 VWs weren't made in 1964... '70 Corvette could have anywhere from 250 - 460 HP and various rear end ratios... Some bring their cars to the strip without even checking first to see if their cars are in sufficient tune to even rev out to the redline...
@@buzzwaldron6195 I still won the race.
Your point would be?
Full size cars like the Catalina were not considered muscles car the name was originally used for midsized to smaller cars with the manufacturers big engines. The lighter bodies with bigger motors made for some real fast cars.
I grew up in this era and we never called a full size Pontiac or Ford Chrysler or Chevy a muscle car.
chevy 409
I thinks the Plymouth Dart with the 407 Boss V8 And the Four-speed Whisper-Shifter ran 0-60 at 4.2
Pontiac GP ran 0-60 in 3.0, 1966.
Anyone else notice the ABSENCE OF CHEVYS n this BIASED video??? No 409/425 will ACTUALLY DID RULE.
They were heavy/slow stock...
the 409s and hot 327s
Narrator apparently does not understand torque. The units of torque are not "torque", but "foot-pounds". Saying "engine is making 355 torque" is like me saying "my weight is 200 weight" rather than 200 pounds.
I just said that to make it quick. If you don't like the way it's said I'll change it.
Sure thing robot.
355 torque is OK, but never say foot-pounds... it's lbs.-ft... nobody measures torque with a 355 feet long arm...
You didn't say what the mustang cost In 64 or what they're worth now Is it supposed to be a surprise
11.7 @ 123 mph, back in 1964? Impressive...
those ran high 10's
The sixty's was my hay day, most of the quarter mile times you gave were wrong. I live at the drag strip in the sixty's and I saw most of those cars run
Why did you omit Plymouth and Dodges 426 Max wedge which like the Ford Galaxie you showed with 2x4 barrel carbs, the Dodge and Plymouth 426 had the 425 horses same as Fords with 2x4s but at the strip the Ford looses every time because it was way heavier than the Mopars.
I really like this video so far pd evolution
Some of these tests are 100 percent wrong the 289 would never do 13.1 or 14.1 maybe 15.4 also GTO times were in the 15.4 range. Maybe before you spread wrong info to to website drag times 1960- to 1972 they get info that's much more accurate
A I is doing the best it can
I've seen 14.7 mentioned many times for the k code 289 hipo.
... thou can't vouch for the '64 year ... 289 Hi-Po's - no 13's BUT can and did mid 14's - I had a 67 that consistantly did it AND many a GTO with their 400's turned 14's - factory stock - but again those were 67's. I was around and viewed em do it live - so no bs here. As for 64 engines : that 421SD Poncho - 426 Wedge - 427 dual-fed Ford AND amiss from this vid - 427 side oilers and dual fed 409's were the real deal rockers n shakers.
The 64 T bolt was an FX car and should not be included in a list of street cars.
agree. Its like having a Bill Jenkins car on the list
Comparing the factory-racing Ford Thunderbolt drag car to stock street cars isn't a fair comparison.
you are exactly right
By the way, all the horsepower quotes in this video? They are GROSS horsepower. Today engines are measured in net horsepower, which is with all the accessories installed AND the exhaust. To correct gross horsepower to modern net horsepower, subtract 25% or multiply by 0.75.
Friend had 66 galaxy 427 R code with heavy duty c6 auto
Sorry, your figures are not even close. Horsepower is not the issue, but with primitive suspension and narrow tires, 11.7 second is not possible in anything resembling a stock setup.
You're correct in a way . The 64 Ford Thunderbolt did it in the 10's supposedly off the showroom floor . 100 or a bit more were built for drag racing .
My father had a 62’ Catalina Super Duty “lightweight” that ran 11.8 in SS/G with 7” rears.
@@Robert-tj3qq Why was the Hemi Dart dominating the tracks and NASCAR , if the Thunderbolt was so bad?
@@tigerboy60 wete those stock for 1964 ? or modified for drag racing , different ball game
@@acepilotson3331I owned a 65 Pontiac 2+2 with a 421/4 speed and 4 barrel carburetor that would would leave over 200 feet of black marks thru 1st and 3rd gear.
Plymouth 👍👏🥳
You must be a revisionist. You re-write history the way you want it and then publish it, thinking that , that will make it true. Nothing makes a lie true.
This list was compiled by someone with no actual historical knowledge of muscle cars , I would argue that some cars chosen and others absent (409 impala for example ) lends to lack of credibility. Also performance data not inline with other test of the time .
Slow cars, a lot of power, but new ordinary cars faster with 100 hp 😂
...a 64 1/2 Mustang... "quickest"
🤣🤣🤣
T Bolt not a muscle car
Holman Enterprise will build you a new one.
This is nonsense. VERY few cars in the '60's could run in the 12's, much less the 11's stock.
STOCK. Let's keep it to apples and apples, shall we? Not Oranges.
I'm typing this in my office, and less than 10 feet behind me in my garage through the wall is my '14 Porsche Cayman S, which is capable of a 12.5 @ 115 mph according to the magazines. I haven't had it at the track to find out, but it would beat all but the very fastest '60's cars through the quarter mile stock, and it is stock.
Shall we take some of those old '60's barges down the Nurburgring? My Cayman S can do the Nordschleife in 7:40.....
Those nasty old cars are good for nostalgia at best. A good car for a 45 mph drive to a Cars & Coffee event on a Sunday with other geriatric cars. No thanx~
I had a simple 64 Chevelle 283/ rated 235 hp, Muncie T10. Redlined 6800 as valve float was evident. 14:88 1/4 mile ET. Beating half these 'muscle cars' lol. Some 'facts' don't add up. Where was Chevy's 409?
I hate when they click bait then feed you bs.
Muncie T10 ?
@@hankd18 that's what we called our close gear 4 speed. Stock shifter immediately replaced with Competion Plus.
@@user-co7fb6qe5w ... quit feedin bs ??? seriously u guys gotta clear out some cobwebs.
Muncie made 20, 21, & the 22 rock crushers ---> a T10 was a borg-warner tranny - their Super T-10 was the boss.
Muncie 20's r widely used in pickups - the 21 was their close ratio as is the 22 - the 22's had back-ground teeth which whined. I should know - I used to rebuild em all and use em all. Now when tellin stories you'll have your chit strait.
@@nemesisxrox6773 no bs inferred in anyway. My times are spot on. I relayed the info that I had a Munice T-10 because that's what I was told it was. I know it was a close gear and dependable tranny. It served me well as did the driveline.
NO Mustang or GTO was touching ANY Mopar, much less a Max Wedge.Stop.
Bullshit I was there am all this is hogwash
Wish this guy could pronounce names right!
A 1964 Corvette with fuel injection was putting out 375 hp at a lower weight than many of these cars