I think that if it was slower than the 70 it was likely the rear axle ratio which was 2.73to 1 for the base 350 automatic. The 350 4V was 3.09 to 1 and the Z28 came with a 3.73 to 1. I had one of these and it was no big deal off the line even after I put headers on it but was nice on the highway and would get as good as 21 mpg. They could have done better with the tires cause mine came with biasply F78x14 Uniroyals. When it was time for new tire we got Michelin radials which was a big improvement. By the time I was done I had moved up to G60x15 which was nice but made the high axle ratio even higher. Note: Z28 came standard with 15 inch wheels. I had that car from new till 1986.
As I watch more though, he seems to deliberately order the lamest GMs.... there's just no neutrality in anything except my shit. I am an open book about anything. Most folks always have a pawn to push somewhere on the landscape.
This was to simulate what would happen in a real time situation. There were no anti-lock brakes in '71. People would panic and slam the brakes....thus locking the tires up and skidding to a stop.
I've owned a '72 RS/SS 4-speed, a '73 Type LT auto and a '70 auto. The '72 was the most fun but sure liked to swap ends. First it would understeer on tight turns, then the rear would come around. I 360'd it twice and never hurt it. Once it was gone, it was gone and you couldn't bring it back in line!
Mmmm. From personal experience you control the car with the right pedal. I used to show people all the time. You start with understeer then you throttle to a neutral point and continue throttling to oversteer. Just for fun if you throttled hard from neutral you would a 4 wheel drift. But you could only do that for a few seconds. But then I was running Gatorbacks on it. Learned to drive the F body on biased plys. Oh I miss those days
Having a 1971 I can say they handled great stock but when you get silly and add coil overs and modern suspension, 4 wheel discs and modern rubber they handle and brake great. The only thing is it is hard to make them ride like a modern muscle car but they can handle like one.
Base rally sport. Looks good not a performance variant though. Most all cars handled and braked that badly then, it was just how they were. And it wasnt considered bad then anyway.. people in the 50s were happy with 150 hp. Times change. 70 to 73 camaros are good looking, especially dressed up as a rally sport/ z28 and LT1 solid lifter 350.
That column shifter just doesn't look right on a Camaro! Please ditch the vinyl top too...otherwise I think the 70-73 Camaros may be the best looking ones ever built
I've seen a fair few of these and I was wondering why in braking tests they measured braking distances with the wheels locked and tyres skidding. This surely relies on tyre traction and not brake performance?!
With the tires locked up it removes the driver variable. Skilled drivers can keep the wheels from locking up but one driver may be slightly better at it than another. Jamming the brakes and skidding gives a better idea of the distance without that variable. I guess.
I really enjoy watching these vids. All the cars are relative to their time period. These cars were slow by todays standards but that had a definite riad presence the cars lack today....to many new cars look the same. But damn that music sucks.
I wonder if the sound editing was this bad when the show was new, or if it deteriorated. I couldn't hear the narrator over the music and the screeching tires.
Had one of these back in the day. My first brand new car. Had the 350 2bbl. It was rated 245 hp, but that was gross. Would be something like 180 net I think. Probably not faster than my current 4 cylinder altima, but it did have loads of low end torque. Not a hot rod, but plenty powerful for everyday driving. Handling and braking was OK, but I put on Pirelli radials and upgraded the shocks. Didnt notice it was particularly tail happy in normal braking or cornering, but boy on snow it was scary. Instant sideways.
Boy does this bring back memories. How about we put some water down and see which side of the road we end up on? Even today driving this era of cars tail gating will really ruin somebody day. By that I don't mean being up someone's rear. Just your reaction time may not save your bacon. You have to stay ahead of your surroundings in traffic cuze your lose to a brake checking fool. It's the 70's after all. Just found these old tapes cool. I've been looking for a 74-77 Z28. I was planning on upgrades and some of the old issues they showed Brakes and suspension will come way before power adders. They never seem bad back then, but they didn't stay stock long.Thank goodness for a strong aftermarket parts we have today.
8.9 seconds 0-60 is an OK time for a 2 barrel 350. Rochester 2G 2 barrel carburetors were extremely reliable, but they weren't great performers. Even a 1974 350 4 barrel in a Corvette is going to beat this 2 barrel Camaro by a wide margin.
Thank God for modern cars! I owned this car once. That's is scary braking and the rear end swerves and tilts on the turns. Still like the looks of it though.
Too bad Bud didn’t like Chevy why else would he test this base model and not a Z/28? Also he never tested any Chevelles so what does that tell you? Imagine having this show and not testing the ‘70 Chevelle SS 454 LS6?
Time and technology certainly have put these cars in their proper place. 8.9 seconds 0-60 would be considered horrible by today's standards. My 2.0L diesel Jetta did that all day long and weighed about the same. My current Clarity Plug-in Hybrid outweighs this car by almost 800 lbs and would leave it in the dust both off the line and to 60 mph. The rest is purely entertainment. Any car that had that much body lean and such poor braking would be deemed unfit for our roads. But, back in the day, it was what the people wanted and would pay for before emissions sapped what was left.
Darryl - I'll guess here, but maybe it was the most common powertrain for them? If there IS a Z/28 road test, I'm sure it's floating around here somewhere! Next vid: the '73 Cuda!
Oh I'm sure he had to test the 'bread and butter' models to get a shot at the more high performance models. Bud likely had some contacts and called form time to time asking 'can you give me something to test?' Obviously he was not the first in line! Keep that in mind when he is testing something really awful, yet he still finds something nice to say!
@@milfordcivic6755 How's it silly?, what makes your arrogance any better?. I tend to agree that the Laguna Sport Chevelle should have been the top Chevy intermediate coupe instead of the MC while Camaro took over the 4 seat sporty coupe segment.
When I was 16 I test drove a rusty 71 or 72 mustang Grande with 351 Cleveland 2 bbl. The car would mercilessly fry the RH rear tire and get a NICE 2nd gear chirp into 2nd. Dad said, ahh too fast for you there son...ended up with a 75 Cutlass 4 door.
3:05 under total lockup: We rate the brakes.... GOOD! 10 years later a fucking Euro 1.6L VW GTi would totally smoke this thing with room for 4 and luggage. So funny.
@@edpoe4622 You deserve to relax. Just having sport with how much technology has improved braking. Get yourself a beer, a spliff, a good movie and a partner and have a laugh, two or three. Peace.
![ฮักเทื่อสุดท้าย - บอย ศิริชัย [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-1PoPoQ-B-k/mqdefault.jpg)
I think that if it was slower than the 70 it was likely the rear axle ratio which was 2.73to 1 for the base 350 automatic. The 350 4V was 3.09 to 1 and the Z28 came with a 3.73 to 1. I had one of these and it was no big deal off the line even after I put headers on it but was nice on the highway and would get as good as 21 mpg. They could have done better with the tires cause mine came with biasply F78x14 Uniroyals. When it was time for new tire we got Michelin radials which was a big improvement. By the time I was done I had moved up to G60x15 which was nice but made the high axle ratio even higher. Note: Z28 came standard with 15 inch wheels. I had that car from new till 1986.
Tough to hear Bud over the tire-squeal!
the 70's-ness of this video is just overwhelming
The issue was the 2 bbl carb. Ditch that for the Quadrajet of the day....would have smoked the tires.
Who cares if the cars are underpowered or shitty!these tests are hilarious an great!!!
As I watch more though, he seems to deliberately order the lamest GMs.... there's just no neutrality in anything except my shit. I am an open book about anything. Most folks always have a pawn to push somewhere on the landscape.
This is old footage of Bud driving his kids to school back in 1971!!!
The brake test is pretty much locking up the tires and praying!
This was to simulate what would happen in a real time situation. There were no anti-lock brakes in '71. People would panic and slam the brakes....thus locking the tires up and skidding to a stop.
Just rely on the 4 fist sized contact patches and the grip of the rubber and see what happens 😂
Beautiful design
Them squealing tires and music though
I've owned a '72 RS/SS 4-speed, a '73 Type LT auto and a '70 auto. The '72 was the most fun but sure liked to swap ends. First it would understeer on tight turns, then the rear would come around. I 360'd it twice and never hurt it. Once it was gone, it was gone and you couldn't bring it back in line!
Mmmm. From personal experience you control the car with the right pedal. I used to show people all the time. You start with understeer then you throttle to a neutral point and continue throttling to oversteer. Just for fun if you throttled hard from neutral you would a 4 wheel drift. But you could only do that for a few seconds. But then I was running Gatorbacks on it. Learned to drive the F body on biased plys.
Oh I miss those days
Having a 1971 I can say they handled great stock but when you get silly and add coil overs and modern suspension, 4 wheel discs and modern rubber they handle and brake great. The only thing is it is hard to make them ride like a modern muscle car but they can handle like one.
One of the best looking Camaros ever built. Pump the pedal during those brake tests would have made better stops.
No 82-92 is best looking Camaro ever built
Why didn’t they pump the brakes? Exactly.
Yeah, Its a hatchback......😭
@@jonathanlawson4667😂 69 and 70. Eighties Camaros are turds.
@FYMASMD still the best looking camaro ever built and any camaro after 74 was a 100hp turd
Base rally sport. Looks good not a performance variant though. Most all cars handled and braked that badly then, it was just how they were. And it wasnt considered bad then anyway.. people in the 50s were happy with 150 hp. Times change. 70 to 73 camaros are good looking, especially dressed up as a rally sport/ z28 and LT1 solid lifter 350.
Some not too sporty features on this car. Column shift, hub caps and a vinyl roof. The RS front end looks good though.
If you opted for an automatic transmission but didn’t order a console, the shifter was on the column.
I see you uploaded a bunch of these, thanks!!!!
oh to have driven these brand new....
Would love to have that car!
I was watching a music video and a car test showed up.
Thank you! Is there by any chance uploading these video's about Cadillacs, Lincolns and Chryslers if they are available?
I love these video's!
That column shifter just doesn't look right on a Camaro! Please ditch the vinyl top too...otherwise I think the 70-73 Camaros may be the best looking ones ever built
I was trying to figure out if it had one or not. A bit awkward lol
I've seen a fair few of these and I was wondering why in braking tests they measured braking distances with the wheels locked and tyres skidding. This surely relies on tyre traction and not brake performance?!
When most people panic they aren't going to pulse the pedal.
Charles - This is possibly the first one I've seen where it looks like the rears AREN'T locked up.
With the tires locked up it removes the driver variable. Skilled drivers can keep the wheels from locking up but one driver may be slightly better at it than another. Jamming the brakes and skidding gives a better idea of the distance without that variable. I guess.
I really enjoy watching these vids. All the cars are relative to their time period. These cars were slow by todays standards but that had a definite riad presence the cars lack today....to many new cars look the same. But damn that music sucks.
I wonder if the sound editing was this bad when the show was new, or if it deteriorated. I couldn't hear the narrator over the music and the screeching tires.
Maindrian Pace believe me 1970s TV shows were not that bad that these post make it seem
awesome car!
Had one of these back in the day. My first brand new car. Had the 350 2bbl. It was rated 245 hp, but that was gross. Would be something like 180 net I think. Probably not faster than my current 4 cylinder altima, but it did have loads of low end torque. Not a hot rod, but plenty powerful for everyday driving. Handling and braking was OK, but I put on Pirelli radials and upgraded the shocks. Didnt notice it was particularly tail happy in normal braking or cornering, but boy on snow it was scary. Instant sideways.
That music is nightmarish.
Boy does this bring back memories. How about we put some water down and see which side of the road we end up on? Even today driving this era of cars tail gating will really ruin somebody day. By that I don't mean being up someone's rear. Just your reaction time may not save your bacon. You have to stay ahead of your surroundings in traffic cuze your lose
to a brake checking fool. It's the 70's after all. Just found these old tapes cool. I've been looking for a 74-77 Z28. I was planning on upgrades and some of the old issues they showed Brakes and suspension will come way before power adders. They never seem bad back then, but they didn't stay stock long.Thank goodness for a strong aftermarket parts
we have today.
You're gonna have a tough time. They didn't make the Z28 in 1975 & 1976.
I had one fish tailed all the time.
must of had 2.56 gears and not running good, my 1971 chevelle 350-2 all stock with 273 gears went 15.78 87mph bone stock back in 1986
not on poly tires though.
I knwo what hes talking about with the seats..... you have no sideways support, I take a corner hard and I almost fall into the passenger seat.
I've thought 8.9 seconds was a really good 0-60mph time by 1971 standards.
My stock 74 Corvette 350 4 BBL was tested at 0-60 in 7 seconds (lower gear ratio 4 speed 4BBL carb std.)
8.9 seconds 0-60 is an OK time for a 2 barrel 350. Rochester 2G 2 barrel carburetors were extremely reliable, but they weren't great performers.
Even a 1974 350 4 barrel in a Corvette is going to beat this 2 barrel Camaro by a wide margin.
Remember, he said it mad around d 245hp but the car weighed around 3300lbs. That's not much hp for that weight. And with a 2bbl carb as well.
@@mrwp819300 It only had 165 net HP and 1 2.73 rear axle, so i think under 9 seconds 0-60 isnt bad.
Good Lord
Those brake tests tho...... 😬
60 mph 8.9 sec this is a cow full of milk
Thank God for modern cars! I owned this car once. That's is scary braking and the rear end swerves and tilts on the turns. Still like the looks of it though.
These guy uses destroy tires in their tests
Anyone know of a first gen monte test by this fella
No tires were killed in the making of this video
Multi-car chain reaction pileups used to be a regular occurrence. I wonder why lol. Thanks Germany for ABS aka Antiblockiersystem.
Modern ABS systems were introduced by Chrysler and Bendix Corp in 1971. It was called "Sure Brake" and was available on the 1971 Imperial.
FUCK ABS.
15hrp difference in same engine built on same assembly line? now that is quality control GM !!
Maybe a chrome bumper Camaro?
Lose the vinyl roof. Makes it look like a fancy pinto
And besides vinyl roofs on 70s cars equals crappy bodywork from the factory.
But it was a great car
Handles like a dumptruck on ice
Did they note any vibration after the brake test? Had to have had some serious flat spots.
It was just straight out moronic to test cars this way. It tells you almost nothing, only which tire can drag a car to a stop the best...nonsense.
my brother had a 70 that he got kicked out of the dragstrip with. going too fast without a roll cage.
Too bad Bud didn’t like Chevy why else would he test this base model and not a Z/28? Also he never tested any Chevelles so what does that tell you? Imagine having this show and not testing the ‘70 Chevelle SS 454 LS6?
He's always been a Ford fanboy, like when he tested the performance version of a Pinto against a Vega wagon. How fair.....
Background music was too loud.Couldn’t hear the Commentary
Plain Jane
Ever wonder why there wasn’t one Pontiac tested throughout the entire series?
Word is that Pontiac executive John DeLorean banged Bud Lindeman's daughter....so no Pontiac reviews......kidding....
@@gt-37guy6 DOH!!
"A down-hill treadmill" C'mon, Bud
Time and technology certainly have put these cars in their proper place. 8.9 seconds 0-60 would be considered horrible by today's standards. My 2.0L diesel Jetta did that all day long and weighed about the same. My current Clarity Plug-in Hybrid outweighs this car by almost 800 lbs and would leave it in the dust both off the line and to 60 mph. The rest is purely entertainment. Any car that had that much body lean and such poor braking would be deemed unfit for our roads. But, back in the day, it was what the people wanted and would pay for before emissions sapped what was left.
Why test a 350 2 barrel why not a Z/28 LT1 4 speed you can tell Bud was not a fan of GM he always tested the base models
Darryl - I'll guess here, but maybe it was the most common powertrain for them? If there IS a Z/28 road test, I'm sure it's floating around here somewhere! Next vid: the '73 Cuda!
these base cars accounted for 70% of the sales. so go figure
Oh I'm sure he had to test the 'bread and butter' models to get a shot at the more high performance models. Bud likely had some contacts and called form time to time asking 'can you give me something to test?' Obviously he was not the first in line! Keep that in mind when he is testing something really awful, yet he still finds something nice to say!
Instead of braking so hard just slam it in reverse.
The Monte Carlo should have died after the '73 model year and concentrated on the Camaro and Chevelle as Chevys go-fast and luxury sport coupes.
The Monte Carlo was a luxury version of the Chevelle. So thats just a silly statement.
@@milfordcivic6755 How's it silly?, what makes your arrogance any better?. I tend to agree that the Laguna Sport Chevelle should have been the top Chevy intermediate coupe instead of the MC while Camaro took over the 4 seat sporty coupe segment.
What a turd. A 351 Windsor mustang would eat its lunch.
When I was 16 I test drove a rusty 71 or 72 mustang Grande with 351 Cleveland 2 bbl. The car would mercilessly fry the RH rear tire and get a NICE 2nd gear chirp into 2nd. Dad said, ahh too fast for you there son...ended up with a 75 Cutlass 4 door.
Eh not so much.
3:05 under total lockup: We rate the brakes.... GOOD!
10 years later a fucking Euro 1.6L VW GTi would totally smoke this thing with room for 4 and luggage. So funny.
Good, you deserve to drive a VW urinal.
@@edpoe4622 You deserve to relax. Just having sport with how much technology has improved braking. Get yourself a beer, a spliff, a good movie and a partner and have a laugh, two or three. Peace.
GM had great stylists in this era...making the actual cars all that much more _disappointing._
Sodham G'morris what? Nothing disappointing about the first gen monte or the 70 chevelle
@@jonmeray713 ...ah, but the _HQ Holden_ and the Vega made up for those! 😉
Sodham G'morris camaro impala nova so still ahead haha. Im a fan of the vega.
@@jonmeray713 A _fan_ of the Vega? Well...some folks are very easily pleased 's all I can say.
Sodham G'morris not much left of it after they are built how i want. It reminds me of a tiny second gen Camaro
The show is a sham..
He can't even drive through the cones professionally.
Some of the worst background music ever.
Pretty confident a new minivan would beat this ugly Camaro in every test
1971 cars could beat 1922 cars in every test.
What’s your point, Poiny?
The music sucks
Christ the music.