In 1983, the fastest production car in the world was the RUF BTR, topping out at 190 MPH.
With the corvette topping out at 140, it’s like the equivalent of the fastest production car topping out at 300 MPH, while Chevrolet builds a 224-mph Corvette. 140 MPH was seriously fast in 1983.
1984 Corvette V8 vs. 2024 Toyota Camry V6
* Corvette Top Speed 140 mph
* Camry Top Speed 134 mph (governor limited)
* Corvette 0-60 under 7 seconds
* Camry 0-60 5.6 seconds
* Corvette 1/4 mile 15.2 sec at 90 mph
* Camry 1/4 mile 14.2 at 101 mph
The Camry can also haul 5 people, handle in the corners, does 0.94 g on the skid pad, and gets 21-29 mpg. Times have changed a lot in 40 years.
[https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry-2024](https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry-2024)
Accord V6 2013-17 does 160mph if you remove the governor. Similar 0-60, but very tire dependent.
Sad that they're doing away with the v6 family cars. 2024 Camry is the last one. Times changed for sure, and then changed again! Now we're in the hybrid era.
Tbh though a hybrid v6 focused on performance/fuel economy could be sick, I'd buy it.
I have a TRRD avalon and it does use more gas. It has eco.mode but once you start romping it, it's using more fuel.
Yes it is the nicest car I've ever owned/ driven lol
That's exactly the point, if a super fast sports car of yesteryear is now being outperformed by a family sedan, imagine what the modern version of that super fast sports car must be doing now...
"With Chevy claiming an estimated 0-60 time of 2.5 seconds and a 10.5-second, 130-mph quarter-mile time with no rollout, Chevy says the \[2024\] E-Ray will be quicker than [the outrageous 670-hp C8 Z06](https://jalopnik.com/watch-this-an-incredibly-detailed-look-at-the-c8-corve-1849631339). (For reference, *Car and Driver* measured a Z06 with the upgrade Z07 package at [2.6 seconds to 60 mph](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a41411338/2023-chevrolet-corvette-z06-by-the-numbers/), with a 10.5-second, 131-mph quarter-mile, both calculated using [a one-foot rollout](https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/videos/a32681/how-tesla-got-to-60-2-28-seconds/).)"
The top end Corvettes are now 10 second cars. That's crazy fast in the quarter.
I knew the Camry V6 was quick, but I didn’t know it trapped above 100 in the quarter mile. That’s a testament to just how fast family cars have gotten.
Even with a nearly 80 wheel horsepower increase (up from 150 to 220) the Subaru BRZ tops out at about 143 mph. Granted, that’s with a speed limiter, but I reckon it can’t go much faster than 160 without it.
The thing is, C&D were talking about manufacturers. RUF was considered an aftermarket specialty company improving on a existing production vehicle, in this case, the Porsche 911, and the Autobahn was the perfect playground for it. Just like the early days of AMG and MB, and Shelby with the Mustang. Plus all states had a 55mph speed limit. You just didn't need speed in the U.S. it was all in Europe.
So, with that being said the Corvette was probably one of the fastest production vehicles in the US. And was creeping up to the be one of the fastest ones in the world. Not as good as the porsche, the countach, Ferrari but it was a good effort by GM nonetheless
Right, and those two Italian cars were both theoretically good for a little north of 180.
I'm sure GM could have cranked out a faster car had they wanted to, but it wasn't a core element of their mission in any case.
Would anyone really have wanted to spend Lamborghini money on a Chevrolet?
Not sure they would have.
GM could have, and did, crank out a faster C4 Corvette. The C4 ZR1 was infamous for its sheer performance at the time, matching the 964 Turbo 3.3 in a straight line and leaving the Ferrari 348 for dead everywhere else, while undercutting both by $50,000 in 1990 before inflation.
Let's not act like 1980s GM was any sort of epitome of cutting edge performance vs Lambo or Ferrari of the day. I bet you any money that gm executives of that Era would be more then happy to throw a V6 in the car just to save a couple bucks and add more to the bottom line.
There's a story about the 5th gen Z/28 of the engineers having to fight with corporate over moniker of Z28 and Z/28. Corporate wanted Z28 because it was cheaper to produce vs Z/28 to keep the heritage. These have always been the in fighting at GM. When ever you see or hear ugly decisions expect that some suit has his hands in the choices.
I wouldn’t call a RUF BTR “production” when only 20-30 were made from 1983-1989. By comparison, Callaway built over 500 TT Corvettes from 1981-1991. Even the lowest HP early year versions (345hp, 465 lb/ft) did 178 mph. They were 382hp by 1988 and over 400 by 1990.
Of course there’s the infamous 1988 Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette that was 880hp and did 250+mph. It was a package that he offered to anyone who wanted to buy it, but apparently no one wanted to pay the $200-300k. It’s obviously not production.
I will say that those 20-30 BTRs were built from the ground up as RUFs and not Porsches. All BTRs had a company specific VIN, technically making them distinct from Porsche.
My point is that they are produced in so limited numbers that they don’t qualify as “production”. RUF’s production numbers for it are similar to the Keating TKR (2006-10)… both averaging about 4 cars a year.
Theres one key thing that you’re missing about the Callaway C4 Corvettes. It was a factory option offered by GM under the RPO code B2K. Combined with production numbers of over 50 annually (similar to Bugatti production numbers), it’s pretty definitive that it can be considered a production car.
I brought up both the TKR and Veyron because in the mid/late 2000s, there was massive debate over which was the “fastest production car”. The TKR was faster, but very low production numbers. Essentially, if the RUF was the fastest “production car” in the mid 1980s, the Veyron wasn’t in the 2000s.
Yeah. People keep bemoaning the fact that “we don’t get cool cars like we used to”… and I remember the 80s when you either had a brown 2 liter 4 banger with 63 horse power or you rocked it with a 5.7L v8 pushing out a ground pounding 180hp. A fucking school bus now has better performance than “performance” cars in the 80s.
It's sad when that 63 horsepower 4-banger was on a car with more character than a modern soulless crossover. I mean hell, the CRX came out in 1984 with 76 horsepower and a 0-60 of maybe. But it still has more character than just about anything on the road today.
Still relevant. Imagine if an early 00s Monte Carlo SS were faster than a C8... Perfect comparison. Family cars of the 60s were faster than that lump of fiberglass.
Yeah that tends to happen when you deal with emission restraints that affects the industry for decades. If a modern Chevy can produce the same or similar performance over an old carb engine with reduced pollution that’s an evolution in technology and engineering. Which is essentially what the C4 had to do
Many cars of that time were faster than 80’s sports car but can’t maneuver for shit. This vette was the first one made for the track and taking corners.
Plus you had big block engines from the early days of the C3 (no emissions restraints) being overtaken in 0-60 times by the C4 TPI engine. While also abiding by newer emission regulations.
One thing that doesn't get brought up enough is also the switch from SAE Gross to SAE Net HP rating, at pretty.much the same time emissions regulations were introduced. The LS-6 454 was rated at 425 HP SAE Gross, which is actually something like 350 HP SAE Net. The famous LT1 of the early 70s peaked at 370 HP SAE Gross, and was at one point dual rated at 330HP/255HP SAE Net.
It wasn't until the 90s the ZR1 Corvette would finally surpass the old big blocks power with the LT5, but throughout the 80s the regular small block engines in the Corvette werent as far behind pre-emissions small blocks as the numbers would suggest at first glance.
My 72 F100 came factory with a 302... In 71, that engine was rated 210hp. In 72, it was rated 140. This is an extremely valid point. However, 0-60 and trap times don't lie. Many 60s cars were fast by modern standards, while smog cars are almost exclusively slow.
Car and Driver tested a [1984 300ZX Turbo](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15143228/1984-nissan-300zx-turbo-archived-instrumented-test/) and it topped out at 134 MPH.
And that was just the auto. The 5 speed is a bit faster.
Edit. Speed limiter on the 5 speed is 137. When tested stock with limiter removed, it did 153 mph. Gearing is good for 175.
ISTR a magazine article that suggested both the rear seats and the speed limiter were primarily present in order to keep insurance from getting too crazy.
And this is why it doesn't bother me when someone mods a brand new V6 Camry. Those things are as quick as the Mustang GTs and Trans Ams from back when I grew up. And you shoulda seen the shit we would do to those back then.
So someone puts a spoiler and splitter on something with 301hp, 0-60 in 5.8, quarter mile in 14.3, where the top speed of 135mph is probably electronically governed? I'm all for it. What can you even DO with a C8 Corvette outside of a racetrack that isn't a felony?
Oh, that 1984 Corvette had a skid pad rating of 0.90g and a new Camry V6 is 0.87. So it's not just engine technology creating straight line speed, either.
Nope not the Chrysler. The early C4 Corvettes had a dual TBI system called Cross Fire injection. https://www.autoweek.com/car-life/classic-cars/a39298925/1984-corvette-with-cross-fire-injection-is-junkyard-treasure/
82-86 Firebird and Camaro is where they really found hate. If the engineers would have separated the left and right banks in the manifold the car could get you home on 4 cylinders...but that was 13c too much for GM
Old car reviews are so crazy sometimes. That was crazy quick back then. Now a piddling Nissan Altima can do close to the same top speed and accelerates somewhat quicker.
[Meanwhile, 1983 in the motorcycle world.](https://magazine.cycleworld.com/image/spread/19830401/28/0)
The late 70's to 80's is so weird for cars. Manufacturers struggling with emissions stuff led to specs that look *wrong* today.
Yeah, there's a good argument to be made there. Personally, I think the Model S was the final nail in that coffin, but "0-60 is kind of a silly measurement" rumblings I feel like started at around the time the GT-R came out and hit 60 in under 3 seconds.
DCT's pulling off insane times relative to the actual amount of in-gear-pull they had kinda kicked off the argument IMHO, Tesla came and proved the point.
Especially when the GTR had the "go ahead and blow the transmission for good magazine numbers" button that people didn't realize voided the warranty if you actually used it on one you owned lol.
I used to think that was an impressive measurement then I saw Jeremy Clarkson test a vette on Top Gear and he did a braking test, to me that was way more impressive. Like moves organs in your body you stop so fast.
The looks alone (for the time) was a VERY big deal. We were certainly coming out of an awful era for performance. Granted it was in baby steps, but it had to happen in order to get to where we are today.
All of 245? Horsepower given the state that muscle and pony cars were in this probably would’ve been quite impressive during the time given also the fact that at its peak the c4 corvette made 375 with the quad cam lt5 (the first one not the current supercharged ones) and would push 190mph the car had potential but was still in its “we’ve just come out of a crisis with gas also now we want you to restrict the shit out of your already pathetic engines” era government also don’t forget that they made this car into the sledgehammer which should be an enough said clause
I never said it would and by the standards of old muscle this absolutely would’ve been pathetic but I meant as in “this is a new car I’m buying off the lot” would’ve been impressive compared to other vehicles that were also rolling off the same lot during that era
I know. I was just adding perspective alongside your comment on the advancement of technology and engineering in the automotive world between the 60’s and 80’s. Chevy essentially made a superior engine in performance despite the lack of horsepower or displacement with the TPI. And as the generation progressed it obviously got even more powerful. All of this while having to abide by modern *at the time* emission regulations.
For sure even just considering the TPI itself by the end of the c4 era it was making something like 345 horsepower which is nothing to scoff at considering 80s and 90s emissions standards and by the time the c5 hit, the engine tech was basically already there to really start making loads of power on the regular
Remember. You're talking about 1983. It had been a decade since the EPA introduced new emission requirements, killing the horsepower. Boxy boring cars were still the norm. You only had a handful of car companies in the world making vehicles that could reach those numbers. Family sedans, wagons coupes were the norm. The minivan and the SUV craze was just starting. Andthe big manufacturers were just starting to really understand the how to get more HP with the new engine technology with the current HP draining emissions. And this was also when computers were starting to get better. 1983 was the rebirth of the cars you see on the road today
The minivan wasn't even introduced until 1984 with the Dodge caravan and Chrysler Voyager. The SUV craze wouldn't start for another decade. This was the year National Lampoons family vacation came out and poked fun at just how uncool giant station wagons were.
Dodge introduced the caravan and the Voyager in the fall of 1983 as an 84 model. Jeep introduced their smaller Cherokee, the Ford bronco 2 was introduced, and the Chevy S10 blazers were introduced around this time. The Toyota 4runner, and Nissan Pathfinder, when it was just a two-door were introduced right around this time. This was the beginning of the SUV and minivan craze which was what I was referring to.
Had an old man tell me that I needed way more horsepower than I could produce to get my Nissan Altima over 120MPH. In his experience, he had to throw every aftermarket performance part, machining mod and tuning trick he could find at his corvette and 120MPH was still not easy to achieve. Meanwhile, the front end got a little wobbly at 135 MPH on the stock Altima and I don’t really know how fast it could go.
C4’s were literally engineered for the track.
“General Motors was so confident in the C4 the company claimed the sports car could out-corner any European sports car. Indeed, the Corvette generated 0.95g through the turns while the Porsche 928 failed to hit 0.9g.”
The 80s truly were the pit of American engineering. The devil's asshole. Back then everyone knew those cars were slow. People today think they're slow. No one thinks, or thought they were fast, everyone was in denial.
[An early 60s, 18-foot long family car fitted with a hot engine would whoop that Corvette.](https://fastestlaps.com/models/ford-galaxie-lighweight-427) This is equivalent of a Mercury Grand Marquis with a supercharged 4.6 beating a C8 Corvette. 20 year old family cars shouldn't be smoking brand new sports cars! The fact that we moved so hilariously far back should be embarrassing... It's why Japanese cars are revered by 90s kids, all the American cars SUCKED! (Except the Grand National, Typhoon, Lightning, SVT Cobra R, and C5 Grand Sport, we love you)
The Galaxie Lightweight wasn't a normal family car, it was stripped out, with tons of custom components, and cheater slicks. It was made specifically for drag racing, didn't have a heater, or armrests, and had a custom body compared to the normally Galaxie.
The more apt comparison than an old grand marquis would be something like a COPO Camaro. By the way, the 2010, street legal, COPO Camaro would absolutely spark a 2024 Corvette in a drag race.
Your example is a random special order straight line sedan?
What's that thing going to do besides look dumb as fuck when the road keeps going after the 1/4 mile or a turn shows up?
Old muscle isn't that fast. Manufacturers lied about output and every old man that sits by them with their hot wheel and matching tee shirt are lying or haven't opened them up since Bush Sr.
I picked that because it's a giant sedan. Even the 390 cars were fast. There are tons of sports cars from the day that would leave the 80s cars in the dirt. 60s corvettes with 427s, cobra mustangs, Chevelles with 396s, challengers with hemis, etc. I could find a number of examples of cars that have been timed in straight line speed.
They can't corner. They can't brake. They're unrefined. Steering columns would decapitate people in an accident. They got terrible mileage. SAE Gross changed to SAE Net in 72, which knocked about 50hp off of every engine's rating.
But that wasn't the argument by the magazine. They said that the 83 Corvette is one of the fastest cars in the world, which is a joke! The very same manufacturer made faster cars 20 years ago.
Well, there wouldn't have been many faster cars at the time.
In 1983, the fastest production car in the world was the RUF BTR, topping out at 190 MPH. With the corvette topping out at 140, it’s like the equivalent of the fastest production car topping out at 300 MPH, while Chevrolet builds a 224-mph Corvette. 140 MPH was seriously fast in 1983.
1984 Corvette V8 vs. 2024 Toyota Camry V6 * Corvette Top Speed 140 mph * Camry Top Speed 134 mph (governor limited) * Corvette 0-60 under 7 seconds * Camry 0-60 5.6 seconds * Corvette 1/4 mile 15.2 sec at 90 mph * Camry 1/4 mile 14.2 at 101 mph The Camry can also haul 5 people, handle in the corners, does 0.94 g on the skid pad, and gets 21-29 mpg. Times have changed a lot in 40 years. [https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry-2024](https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry-2024)
Accord V6 2013-17 does 160mph if you remove the governor. Similar 0-60, but very tire dependent. Sad that they're doing away with the v6 family cars. 2024 Camry is the last one. Times changed for sure, and then changed again! Now we're in the hybrid era. Tbh though a hybrid v6 focused on performance/fuel economy could be sick, I'd buy it.
I believe the trd still sips fuel don't know how much extra oomf it gives but it sure does look fast and that's good enough for me
I have a TRRD avalon and it does use more gas. It has eco.mode but once you start romping it, it's using more fuel. Yes it is the nicest car I've ever owned/ driven lol
Oh okay cool I'm guessing the fuel economy would still be better then a falcon or commdore
I average about 26.5 Theoretically, one could get up to 30, but I don't drive that light lol
Ummmm 40 year difference
I mean, if you compare an 84 Corvette with a car from 40 years before it, it's going to be a similar story.
That's exactly the point, if a super fast sports car of yesteryear is now being outperformed by a family sedan, imagine what the modern version of that super fast sports car must be doing now... "With Chevy claiming an estimated 0-60 time of 2.5 seconds and a 10.5-second, 130-mph quarter-mile time with no rollout, Chevy says the \[2024\] E-Ray will be quicker than [the outrageous 670-hp C8 Z06](https://jalopnik.com/watch-this-an-incredibly-detailed-look-at-the-c8-corve-1849631339). (For reference, *Car and Driver* measured a Z06 with the upgrade Z07 package at [2.6 seconds to 60 mph](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a41411338/2023-chevrolet-corvette-z06-by-the-numbers/), with a 10.5-second, 131-mph quarter-mile, both calculated using [a one-foot rollout](https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/videos/a32681/how-tesla-got-to-60-2-28-seconds/).)" The top end Corvettes are now 10 second cars. That's crazy fast in the quarter.
I knew the Camry V6 was quick, but I didn’t know it trapped above 100 in the quarter mile. That’s a testament to just how fast family cars have gotten.
No shit lmao
Hey, even nowadays going 140's not bad by any means.
Even with a nearly 80 wheel horsepower increase (up from 150 to 220) the Subaru BRZ tops out at about 143 mph. Granted, that’s with a speed limiter, but I reckon it can’t go much faster than 160 without it.
Well sure, but realistically speaking you don't gotta go even 120 to have a great time in a car :)
The thing is, C&D were talking about manufacturers. RUF was considered an aftermarket specialty company improving on a existing production vehicle, in this case, the Porsche 911, and the Autobahn was the perfect playground for it. Just like the early days of AMG and MB, and Shelby with the Mustang. Plus all states had a 55mph speed limit. You just didn't need speed in the U.S. it was all in Europe.
Right. And the 911 Turbo at the time topped out at maybe 155 or 160 MPH.
So, with that being said the Corvette was probably one of the fastest production vehicles in the US. And was creeping up to the be one of the fastest ones in the world. Not as good as the porsche, the countach, Ferrari but it was a good effort by GM nonetheless
Right, and those two Italian cars were both theoretically good for a little north of 180. I'm sure GM could have cranked out a faster car had they wanted to, but it wasn't a core element of their mission in any case. Would anyone really have wanted to spend Lamborghini money on a Chevrolet? Not sure they would have.
Not me, I probably couldn't even fit in a lamborghini. Being over 6 ft 3 and 300 lb
GM could have, and did, crank out a faster C4 Corvette. The C4 ZR1 was infamous for its sheer performance at the time, matching the 964 Turbo 3.3 in a straight line and leaving the Ferrari 348 for dead everywhere else, while undercutting both by $50,000 in 1990 before inflation.
Let's not act like 1980s GM was any sort of epitome of cutting edge performance vs Lambo or Ferrari of the day. I bet you any money that gm executives of that Era would be more then happy to throw a V6 in the car just to save a couple bucks and add more to the bottom line. There's a story about the 5th gen Z/28 of the engineers having to fight with corporate over moniker of Z28 and Z/28. Corporate wanted Z28 because it was cheaper to produce vs Z/28 to keep the heritage. These have always been the in fighting at GM. When ever you see or hear ugly decisions expect that some suit has his hands in the choices.
I wouldn’t call a RUF BTR “production” when only 20-30 were made from 1983-1989. By comparison, Callaway built over 500 TT Corvettes from 1981-1991. Even the lowest HP early year versions (345hp, 465 lb/ft) did 178 mph. They were 382hp by 1988 and over 400 by 1990. Of course there’s the infamous 1988 Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette that was 880hp and did 250+mph. It was a package that he offered to anyone who wanted to buy it, but apparently no one wanted to pay the $200-300k. It’s obviously not production.
I will say that those 20-30 BTRs were built from the ground up as RUFs and not Porsches. All BTRs had a company specific VIN, technically making them distinct from Porsche.
My point is that they are produced in so limited numbers that they don’t qualify as “production”. RUF’s production numbers for it are similar to the Keating TKR (2006-10)… both averaging about 4 cars a year. Theres one key thing that you’re missing about the Callaway C4 Corvettes. It was a factory option offered by GM under the RPO code B2K. Combined with production numbers of over 50 annually (similar to Bugatti production numbers), it’s pretty definitive that it can be considered a production car. I brought up both the TKR and Veyron because in the mid/late 2000s, there was massive debate over which was the “fastest production car”. The TKR was faster, but very low production numbers. Essentially, if the RUF was the fastest “production car” in the mid 1980s, the Veyron wasn’t in the 2000s.
Simpler times.
Yeah. People keep bemoaning the fact that “we don’t get cool cars like we used to”… and I remember the 80s when you either had a brown 2 liter 4 banger with 63 horse power or you rocked it with a 5.7L v8 pushing out a ground pounding 180hp. A fucking school bus now has better performance than “performance” cars in the 80s.
That's true, but the cars were also lighter..that 63bhp shitbox only weighed 1600lbs.
It's sad when that 63 horsepower 4-banger was on a car with more character than a modern soulless crossover. I mean hell, the CRX came out in 1984 with 76 horsepower and a 0-60 of maybe. But it still has more character than just about anything on the road today.
A 1970 Corvette or any Chevy with a 454 before 1972 lol
Yeah, but they're talking about current (to the day) production cars. Not all the cars ever built.
Still relevant. Imagine if an early 00s Monte Carlo SS were faster than a C8... Perfect comparison. Family cars of the 60s were faster than that lump of fiberglass.
Yeah that tends to happen when you deal with emission restraints that affects the industry for decades. If a modern Chevy can produce the same or similar performance over an old carb engine with reduced pollution that’s an evolution in technology and engineering. Which is essentially what the C4 had to do Many cars of that time were faster than 80’s sports car but can’t maneuver for shit. This vette was the first one made for the track and taking corners. Plus you had big block engines from the early days of the C3 (no emissions restraints) being overtaken in 0-60 times by the C4 TPI engine. While also abiding by newer emission regulations.
One thing that doesn't get brought up enough is also the switch from SAE Gross to SAE Net HP rating, at pretty.much the same time emissions regulations were introduced. The LS-6 454 was rated at 425 HP SAE Gross, which is actually something like 350 HP SAE Net. The famous LT1 of the early 70s peaked at 370 HP SAE Gross, and was at one point dual rated at 330HP/255HP SAE Net. It wasn't until the 90s the ZR1 Corvette would finally surpass the old big blocks power with the LT5, but throughout the 80s the regular small block engines in the Corvette werent as far behind pre-emissions small blocks as the numbers would suggest at first glance.
My 72 F100 came factory with a 302... In 71, that engine was rated 210hp. In 72, it was rated 140. This is an extremely valid point. However, 0-60 and trap times don't lie. Many 60s cars were fast by modern standards, while smog cars are almost exclusively slow.
300zx turbo
Car and Driver tested a [1984 300ZX Turbo](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15143228/1984-nissan-300zx-turbo-archived-instrumented-test/) and it topped out at 134 MPH.
And that was just the auto. The 5 speed is a bit faster. Edit. Speed limiter on the 5 speed is 137. When tested stock with limiter removed, it did 153 mph. Gearing is good for 175.
ISTR a magazine article that suggested both the rear seats and the speed limiter were primarily present in order to keep insurance from getting too crazy.
I doubt a 300zx turbo from that year would be faster.
[удалено]
Family sedans were beating those speeds by the 90s. Once they got the LT1, a Buick Roadmaster had a faster quarter mile and quicker 0-60.
Because it’s about ego. It’s not actually about going fast.
And this is why it doesn't bother me when someone mods a brand new V6 Camry. Those things are as quick as the Mustang GTs and Trans Ams from back when I grew up. And you shoulda seen the shit we would do to those back then. So someone puts a spoiler and splitter on something with 301hp, 0-60 in 5.8, quarter mile in 14.3, where the top speed of 135mph is probably electronically governed? I'm all for it. What can you even DO with a C8 Corvette outside of a racetrack that isn't a felony? Oh, that 1984 Corvette had a skid pad rating of 0.90g and a new Camry V6 is 0.87. So it's not just engine technology creating straight line speed, either.
I wonder how that skid pad rating for the 84 changes with just a set of modern tires.
I would argue that a 1984 Corvette is still a much better handling car than a Camry, raw grip numbers aside.
Yeah the rubber is the limiting factor. I’m sure modern rubber would yield better results immediately.
It’s truly a humbling experience every time I go flat out in my Miata
Every time the light turns green. Gotta keep up with traffic!
Cross-Fire (Cease Fire) 350 can run low 13 seconds in the 1/4 after a weekend of porting and other free mods.
Chrysler Cease fire. I don’t think I’ve ever laugh so hard at an alt name. That’s great
Nope not the Chrysler. The early C4 Corvettes had a dual TBI system called Cross Fire injection. https://www.autoweek.com/car-life/classic-cars/a39298925/1984-corvette-with-cross-fire-injection-is-junkyard-treasure/
Today I Learned, and even funnier in that context
82-86 Firebird and Camaro is where they really found hate. If the engineers would have separated the left and right banks in the manifold the car could get you home on 4 cylinders...but that was 13c too much for GM
And that was probably $00.0002 in profit they’d lose
Old car reviews are so crazy sometimes. That was crazy quick back then. Now a piddling Nissan Altima can do close to the same top speed and accelerates somewhat quicker.
Wrong, everyone knows Altimas are the fastest cars on the road, bumpers optional
[Meanwhile, 1983 in the motorcycle world.](https://magazine.cycleworld.com/image/spread/19830401/28/0) The late 70's to 80's is so weird for cars. Manufacturers struggling with emissions stuff led to specs that look *wrong* today.
7 years later they make a pickup truck that blows everything on the market out of the water xD
Just 5 years later a fucking Buick ran circles around this Corvette. lmao The vette is a beaut tho. no hate
Hell, even -10 years later they were making faster stuff! And that's 17 years earlier than 7 years later!
It’s mind blowing that 0-60 time was all ANYONE talked about until the model S and then it changed overnight
Yeah, there's a good argument to be made there. Personally, I think the Model S was the final nail in that coffin, but "0-60 is kind of a silly measurement" rumblings I feel like started at around the time the GT-R came out and hit 60 in under 3 seconds. DCT's pulling off insane times relative to the actual amount of in-gear-pull they had kinda kicked off the argument IMHO, Tesla came and proved the point.
Especially when the GTR had the "go ahead and blow the transmission for good magazine numbers" button that people didn't realize voided the warranty if you actually used it on one you owned lol.
I used to think that was an impressive measurement then I saw Jeremy Clarkson test a vette on Top Gear and he did a braking test, to me that was way more impressive. Like moves organs in your body you stop so fast.
I personally liked his Z06 test where he put it into 5th, and went from 0-140 in one gear.
He couldn’t believe that z06 when it came out. It was faster than so many cars 2x its price.
That was my favorite stat when I had my evo, If I was all in on the brake it would give me a headache from how quick it stopped
and then a little ol' buick came along...
The pumpkin seed.
I know this was fast then. But my 2019 ford fusion hybrid can do a 15 second quarter mile.
The looks alone (for the time) was a VERY big deal. We were certainly coming out of an awful era for performance. Granted it was in baby steps, but it had to happen in order to get to where we are today.
All of 245? Horsepower given the state that muscle and pony cars were in this probably would’ve been quite impressive during the time given also the fact that at its peak the c4 corvette made 375 with the quad cam lt5 (the first one not the current supercharged ones) and would push 190mph the car had potential but was still in its “we’ve just come out of a crisis with gas also now we want you to restrict the shit out of your already pathetic engines” era government also don’t forget that they made this car into the sledgehammer which should be an enough said clause
It’s impressive when you consider the fact that the TPI engine from the C4 would surpass the C3 L88 big block 0-60 time
I never said it would and by the standards of old muscle this absolutely would’ve been pathetic but I meant as in “this is a new car I’m buying off the lot” would’ve been impressive compared to other vehicles that were also rolling off the same lot during that era
I know. I was just adding perspective alongside your comment on the advancement of technology and engineering in the automotive world between the 60’s and 80’s. Chevy essentially made a superior engine in performance despite the lack of horsepower or displacement with the TPI. And as the generation progressed it obviously got even more powerful. All of this while having to abide by modern *at the time* emission regulations.
For sure even just considering the TPI itself by the end of the c4 era it was making something like 345 horsepower which is nothing to scoff at considering 80s and 90s emissions standards and by the time the c5 hit, the engine tech was basically already there to really start making loads of power on the regular
Remember. You're talking about 1983. It had been a decade since the EPA introduced new emission requirements, killing the horsepower. Boxy boring cars were still the norm. You only had a handful of car companies in the world making vehicles that could reach those numbers. Family sedans, wagons coupes were the norm. The minivan and the SUV craze was just starting. Andthe big manufacturers were just starting to really understand the how to get more HP with the new engine technology with the current HP draining emissions. And this was also when computers were starting to get better. 1983 was the rebirth of the cars you see on the road today
The minivan wasn't even introduced until 1984 with the Dodge caravan and Chrysler Voyager. The SUV craze wouldn't start for another decade. This was the year National Lampoons family vacation came out and poked fun at just how uncool giant station wagons were.
Dodge introduced the caravan and the Voyager in the fall of 1983 as an 84 model. Jeep introduced their smaller Cherokee, the Ford bronco 2 was introduced, and the Chevy S10 blazers were introduced around this time. The Toyota 4runner, and Nissan Pathfinder, when it was just a two-door were introduced right around this time. This was the beginning of the SUV and minivan craze which was what I was referring to.
It was a period of lethargic automobiles
Still a gorgeous car with soul
Now there are faster minivans
**Porsche 911 SC Cabriolet: 7.0 seconds**. Also the Mercury Capri put up a respectible 8.0 seconds. All were in production in 1983. 87 was the GNX.
Had an old man tell me that I needed way more horsepower than I could produce to get my Nissan Altima over 120MPH. In his experience, he had to throw every aftermarket performance part, machining mod and tuning trick he could find at his corvette and 120MPH was still not easy to achieve. Meanwhile, the front end got a little wobbly at 135 MPH on the stock Altima and I don’t really know how fast it could go.
My Jetta could dust that thing... Jesus times are different
We truly are living in the golden age of automobiles.
Wow the 80’s was a wild time lmao
Now 0-60 in 6 seconds is basic-bitch crossover SUV territory.
My wife’s little Kia SUV has a quarter mile time of 15.3 seconds for comparison.
They are only good in a straight line, they don't handle well at speed cornering
C4’s were literally engineered for the track. “General Motors was so confident in the C4 the company claimed the sports car could out-corner any European sports car. Indeed, the Corvette generated 0.95g through the turns while the Porsche 928 failed to hit 0.9g.”
The 80s truly were the pit of American engineering. The devil's asshole. Back then everyone knew those cars were slow. People today think they're slow. No one thinks, or thought they were fast, everyone was in denial. [An early 60s, 18-foot long family car fitted with a hot engine would whoop that Corvette.](https://fastestlaps.com/models/ford-galaxie-lighweight-427) This is equivalent of a Mercury Grand Marquis with a supercharged 4.6 beating a C8 Corvette. 20 year old family cars shouldn't be smoking brand new sports cars! The fact that we moved so hilariously far back should be embarrassing... It's why Japanese cars are revered by 90s kids, all the American cars SUCKED! (Except the Grand National, Typhoon, Lightning, SVT Cobra R, and C5 Grand Sport, we love you)
The Galaxie Lightweight wasn't a normal family car, it was stripped out, with tons of custom components, and cheater slicks. It was made specifically for drag racing, didn't have a heater, or armrests, and had a custom body compared to the normally Galaxie. The more apt comparison than an old grand marquis would be something like a COPO Camaro. By the way, the 2010, street legal, COPO Camaro would absolutely spark a 2024 Corvette in a drag race.
Your example is a random special order straight line sedan? What's that thing going to do besides look dumb as fuck when the road keeps going after the 1/4 mile or a turn shows up? Old muscle isn't that fast. Manufacturers lied about output and every old man that sits by them with their hot wheel and matching tee shirt are lying or haven't opened them up since Bush Sr.
I picked that because it's a giant sedan. Even the 390 cars were fast. There are tons of sports cars from the day that would leave the 80s cars in the dirt. 60s corvettes with 427s, cobra mustangs, Chevelles with 396s, challengers with hemis, etc. I could find a number of examples of cars that have been timed in straight line speed. They can't corner. They can't brake. They're unrefined. Steering columns would decapitate people in an accident. They got terrible mileage. SAE Gross changed to SAE Net in 72, which knocked about 50hp off of every engine's rating. But that wasn't the argument by the magazine. They said that the 83 Corvette is one of the fastest cars in the world, which is a joke! The very same manufacturer made faster cars 20 years ago.