CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2014, 09:18:44 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
105662 Posts in 12338 Topics by 4753 Members
Latest Member: stpatrick
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Model Specific Discussions
| |-+  6-cylinder Camaros
| | |-+  6 Cylinder Vs. V8 from 1967 Car Life Magazine Test
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: 6 Cylinder Vs. V8 from 1967 Car Life Magazine Test  (Read 689 times)
68SixBangerRS
Member
***
Posts: 40


Camaro Project from HELL


View Profile Email
« on: May 08, 2014, 03:09:26 PM »

Hello All...thought some of you might find this information interesting. Car Life magazine has been defunct for probably 40 years, so I don't believe this runs afoul of any copyright laws. Anyway, Car Life ran an interesting article in their March 1967 issue where they compared an SS-RS 350 with a 4 speed and 3.55 rear-end to a plain coupe with a 250-6 with a 3 speed manual trans. (column shifter) and a 3.31 rear-end. Both cars had manual steering, and drum brakes all around. As tested weight (with driver and fuel) on the V8 was listed as 3,620 lbs. vs. 3,408 lbs for the 6. Weight distribution for the V8 was 58/42 front-to-rear, and 55/45 for the 6. Spring rates in lb./in. for the V8 were 125/131 front-to-rear, and 124/121 for the 6. Acceleration in seconds 0-30 mph (V8 listed first) was 2.9 vs. 4.8, 0-60 was 7.8 vs. 11.4, 0-80 was 12.8 vs. 21.7, and the 1/4 mile times/speeds were 15.8 @ 89 mph vs. 18.5 @ 75 mph. The author noted that acceleration times for the 6 would have improved with a floor shift instead of the balky column shift. Fuel economy was 16-19 mpg for the V8, and 19-22 mpg for the 6. Braking for both cars was virtually identical from 80-0 mph at 21 ft. per second, although the V8 exhibited slight fading on the first stop and noticeable fading on the 2nd stop (the 6 showed no fading on either stop). The author said, "The more equal weight distribution of the six cylinder car manifested itself in good cornering and handling characteristics, less rear wheelspin under acceleration, and better braking action. Camaro's inherent understeer was notably less less in the big six than in the SS 350 version". The author preferred the basic interior to the "chrome splotched" environment of the SS, and concluded that the Camaro with a 6 constituted "quite a bargain in on-the-road performance, paritcularly at $839.00 less than the SS".
Logged
69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2458


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2014, 10:46:35 PM »

As a percentage of the cost, $839 was a very significant savings!
Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
68SixBangerRS
Member
***
Posts: 40


Camaro Project from HELL


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2014, 04:45:51 PM »

That would be several thousand dollars in today's money. I'm glad I'm keeping my '68 a six. I'm posting some more data on another topic tonight that compares all of the 1967 pony cars with sixes.
Logged
janobyte
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 754


1968 z/28

bajcer@msn.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2014, 06:16:29 PM »

I've posted my thoughts before on theses inline 6 banger cars...love them in this day and age. 19-22 mpg on low grade pump gas--lots of Cruise ins. Daily driver. I had an early Malibu in high school (no show car, pieces of sheet metal for floor boards) with a 6 and a glide. Few bucks in the tank would go a long way. I just think there is something cool about keeping the 6 in it !  Looks and Fuel economy.
Logged
68SixBangerRS
Member
***
Posts: 40


Camaro Project from HELL


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2014, 07:10:42 PM »

Gas here in OH is almost $4.00 per gallon, and I doubt things will improve much as time goes by...which makes the 6 cyl cars more desirable. I think that over time they will become more appreciated and loved. It would be nice if there was a class for 6 cylinder cars at Camaro shows since the SS and Z cars garner the most attention and awards, but I don't know if there would be enough participants (not many 6 cyl cars left) to justify such a class.
Logged
janobyte
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 754


1968 z/28

bajcer@msn.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2014, 09:20:49 AM »

All the more reason to stay the route your on Wink

I'm up by Cleveland, if you get on Crusin times website, you'll see multi events every weekend---you can cover a lot of ground with that car when she's done. With the next generation of hot rodders doing so much with inline engines ( everything old is new) I think cars like yours will fill a niche. It's all about performance + fuel economy. You really can go some original  (different)directions under the hood maintaining the numbers block and head. IMO.
Logged
68SixBangerRS
Member
***
Posts: 40


Camaro Project from HELL


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2014, 08:37:40 AM »

I'm probably 3 or 4 years from cruising in Ol' Krusty, but then I'll drive the wheels off of it. It goes to the body man this summer for mucho welding, then I can begin the long process of smoothing the body and getting it ready for single-stage urethane paint. You'll see it one of these days as I'm often in the Cleveland area with my fiancee to see her family (from Middleburg Hts.).
Logged
janobyte
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 754


1968 z/28

bajcer@msn.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2014, 09:40:44 PM »

be looking
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.075 seconds with 18 queries.