> 62 Chevrolet Impala SS409 vs. 63 Ford Galaxie 500+ more
#1
01-11-2013, 11:29 AM
> 62 Chevrolet Impala SS409 vs. 63 Ford Galaxie 500+ more
Hi Member's, which one would you like to own/drive ?
Did any member ever had one of the below ?
Which one do you think is faster ?
I EnJoyed reading what these old ride were like & I hope that you enjoy also...
Comparison:
1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 vs. 1963 Ford Galaxie 500
Monday Muscle: Sampling Two Big-Block Veterans of the Win-on-Sunday/Sell-on-Monday Wars That Ushered in the Muscle Car Era
</HGROUP>By Frank Markus | Photos By Daniel Byrne | January 04, 2013 |
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Head To Head" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694671/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-head-to-head.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694668/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end-in-moiton.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Rear End" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497826/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-end.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">See All 36 Photos
<!--Start Ad Control--><!--adscriptdb start-->
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Head To Head" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694671/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-head-to-head.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">In the beginning, it was all so simple. Rich folks could afford powerful cars bearing lofty names like Duesenberg and Stutz, while the rabble was content with anything greater than one-horse power, and the odors and aggravation that entailed. But pretty soon, the masses became restless and took things into their own hands, creating powerful cars in their garages, usually by upgrading their ubiquitous flathead Ford V-8s with outlaw cranks, cams, heads, carbs, and more.By the mid-1950s introduction of Chevy's OHV small-block V-8
and the ensuing horsepower war it sparked, the shoe was on the other foot. Now the aristocracy contented itself with "adequate" horsepower delivered in silence, while the masses reveled in gauche tire-squealing, pavement-melting misbehavior, and the "low-price three" (Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth) duked it out in the Super Stock NASCAR and NHRA racing classes.
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694668/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end-in-moiton.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">Demand for bigger, better, flashier cars from a flourishing postwar middle class inspired the introduction of the Impala trim package in 1958, borrowing its name from 1956's Corvette Impala concept. Developed by Chevy chief engineer Ed Cole, the option proved so popular that Impala became its own model in 1959 and, by the end of the 1960s, it ranked as the best-selling full-size nameplate of all time. Ford introduced its top-shelf Galaxie series for 1959, and by 1960 it was Ford's most popular model series.Florid chromed frippery and equipment were adding weight faster than power could be added to the mainstream small-block V-8s, prompting the need for big-blocks. Chevy introduced its W-series big-block V-8 in 1958 (so-called because of its W-like valve covers). Originally intended as a low-rev torque-monster for truck duty, it was developed with several small-block tricks, like identical left and right cylinder heads with staggered valves, lightweight tubular pushrods and stamped valve rockers, and all the go-fast fuel delivery systems developed for the mouse motor.
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694743/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">In truth, Chevy's domesticated truck motor wasn't that great a competition engine. The Bow Tie brand's racing success stemmed primarily from its interpretation of the voluntary ban on factory racing support the Auto Manufacturer's Association had agreed to in June 1957. GM President Harlow Curtis suggested the ban in hopes of averting government regulation of motorsport, but while Ford adhered to the spirit of the ban, dutifully selling its entire inventory of racing parts to race shop Holman & Moody, the Chevy folks winked at the letter of it, and continued to engineer new racing hardware for sale over the counter at dealerships. On December 17, 1960, Chevy announced a new Impala SS package for 1961 that would be available with a bored and stroked version of the big-block displacing 409 cubic inches and producing 360 hp. Many musclecar enthusiasts point to the 1961 Impala SS409 (only 142 built) as the first true musclecar, but the one that got the Beach Boys singing was the solid-lifter dual-quad 11:1 compression variant that arrived for 1962. These mighty 409s became the engines to beat in the Super Stock class on NASCAR circuits and NHRA dragstrips.By 1961, Ford had had quite enough of the weekly shellackings it was taking, and the company advised the AMA it was suspending its support of the ban on racing and would henceforth provide full factory support of its 390-cubic-inch FE motor. That mill produced 375 hp with the single-four-barrel NASCAR setup and 401 with the triple-two-barrel NHRA induction, and both fared well in competition until Chevy's mighty 409 arrived on the scene. Ford responded by boring the 390 out to 406 cubes, which was good for 405 hp in top 3x2-barrel trim. Concurrently, Plymouth introduced its 410-hp 413 Wedge, and Pontiac tuned its Super Duty 421 to make 405 hp. Each of these 400-club fire-breathers featured high-lift, long-duration cams and compression ratios of at least 11:1.
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Wheels" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694818/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-wheels.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">Ford's power may have been competitive, but a 1962 restyle dropped the slick, curved Starliner roofline for a formal Thunderbird-style notchback that cost the Blue Oval dearly in aerodynamic drag on the big tracks like Daytona. At the Atlanta 500 in 1962, Ford and the Holman & Moody team showed up with a "Starlift" removable hardtop shaped like the aero-sleek '61 Starliner coupe that bolted onto the convertible and was allegedly available over the counter, though the stock convertible windows didn't fit the top's openings. NASCAR OK'd it for that race, Ford won, and NASCAR instantly kiboshed the cheater top. The fix: a crash program to design the Galaxie Sports Hardtop (aka slantback, fastback, or scatback in the day), which made its production debut in mid-March as a 1963 model. Available only on top Galaxie 500 and 500 XL models, the new roofline lowered the top by 2 inches and elevated the car's lap speed at Daytona from 155 to 159 mph, according to tests conducted by Hot Rod magazine in February 1963 in a 406-powered prototype. Drag was reportedly lowered by 28 percent. But that roofline wasn't the only trick Ford had up its sleeve. Taking full advantage of NASCAR's new 7.0-liter displacement limit, Ford bored the 406 out 0.1 inch and strengthened the engine considerably with impact-extruded pistons, stronger connecting rods and cross-bolted main-bearing caps, improved cylinder heads with bigger valves, etc. Rated at 410 hp and 476 lb-ft with the single-carb NASCAR setup, the 427 boosted lap speed to 161.3 mph in the same Hot Rod test, and in full Homan & Moody race trim the 427 topped 500 hp.
Next Page
Did any member ever had one of the below ?
Which one do you think is faster ?
I EnJoyed reading what these old ride were like & I hope that you enjoy also...
Comparison:
1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 vs. 1963 Ford Galaxie 500
Monday Muscle: Sampling Two Big-Block Veterans of the Win-on-Sunday/Sell-on-Monday Wars That Ushered in the Muscle Car Era
</HGROUP>By Frank Markus | Photos By Daniel Byrne | January 04, 2013 |
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Head To Head" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694671/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-head-to-head.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694668/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end-in-moiton.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Rear End" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497826/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-end.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">See All 36 Photos<!--Start Ad Control--><!--adscriptdb start-->
<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Head To Head" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694671/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-head-to-head.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">In the beginning, it was all so simple. Rich folks could afford powerful cars bearing lofty names like Duesenberg and Stutz, while the rabble was content with anything greater than one-horse power, and the odors and aggravation that entailed. But pretty soon, the masses became restless and took things into their own hands, creating powerful cars in their garages, usually by upgrading their ubiquitous flathead Ford V-8s with outlaw cranks, cams, heads, carbs, and more.By the mid-1950s introduction of Chevy's OHV small-block V-8 and the ensuing horsepower war it sparked, the shoe was on the other foot. Now the aristocracy contented itself with "adequate" horsepower delivered in silence, while the masses reveled in gauche tire-squealing, pavement-melting misbehavior, and the "low-price three" (Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth) duked it out in the Super Stock NASCAR and NHRA racing classes.<META content="1962 Chevrolet Impala SS409 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End In Moiton" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694668/1962-Chevrolet-Impala-SS409-1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end-in-moiton.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">Demand for bigger, better, flashier cars from a flourishing postwar middle class inspired the introduction of the Impala trim package in 1958, borrowing its name from 1956's Corvette Impala concept. Developed by Chevy chief engineer Ed Cole, the option proved so popular that Impala became its own model in 1959 and, by the end of the 1960s, it ranked as the best-selling full-size nameplate of all time. Ford introduced its top-shelf Galaxie series for 1959, and by 1960 it was Ford's most popular model series.Florid chromed frippery and equipment were adding weight faster than power could be added to the mainstream small-block V-8s, prompting the need for big-blocks. Chevy introduced its W-series big-block V-8 in 1958 (so-called because of its W-like valve covers). Originally intended as a low-rev torque-monster for truck duty, it was developed with several small-block tricks, like identical left and right cylinder heads with staggered valves, lightweight tubular pushrods and stamped valve rockers, and all the go-fast fuel delivery systems developed for the mouse motor.
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Rear End" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497826/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-end.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497826+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-end.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Taillight" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497832/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-taillight.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497832+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-taillight.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">- <META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Seatbelt" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497829/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-seatbelt.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497829+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-seatbelt.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Radio" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694809/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-radio.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694809+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-radio.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Gear Shifter" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497823/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-gear-shifter.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497823+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-gear-shifter.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Details" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694740/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-details.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694740+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-details.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Front End" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694743/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-front-end.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">In truth, Chevy's domesticated truck motor wasn't that great a competition engine. The Bow Tie brand's racing success stemmed primarily from its interpretation of the voluntary ban on factory racing support the Auto Manufacturer's Association had agreed to in June 1957. GM President Harlow Curtis suggested the ban in hopes of averting government regulation of motorsport, but while Ford adhered to the spirit of the ban, dutifully selling its entire inventory of racing parts to race shop Holman & Moody, the Chevy folks winked at the letter of it, and continued to engineer new racing hardware for sale over the counter at dealerships. On December 17, 1960, Chevy announced a new Impala SS package for 1961 that would be available with a bored and stroked version of the big-block displacing 409 cubic inches and producing 360 hp. Many musclecar enthusiasts point to the 1961 Impala SS409 (only 142 built) as the first true musclecar, but the one that got the Beach Boys singing was the solid-lifter dual-quad 11:1 compression variant that arrived for 1962. These mighty 409s became the engines to beat in the Super Stock class on NASCAR circuits and NHRA dragstrips.By 1961, Ford had had quite enough of the weekly shellackings it was taking, and the company advised the AMA it was suspending its support of the ban on racing and would henceforth provide full factory support of its 390-cubic-inch FE motor. That mill produced 375 hp with the single-four-barrel NASCAR setup and 401 with the triple-two-barrel NHRA induction, and both fared well in competition until Chevy's mighty 409 arrived on the scene. Ford responded by boring the 390 out to 406 cubes, which was good for 405 hp in top 3x2-barrel trim. Concurrently, Plymouth introduced its 410-hp 413 Wedge, and Pontiac tuned its Super Duty 421 to make 405 hp. Each of these 400-club fire-breathers featured high-lift, long-duration cams and compression ratios of at least 11:1.<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Wheels" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694818/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-wheels.jpg itemprop="contentUrl">Ford's power may have been competitive, but a 1962 restyle dropped the slick, curved Starliner roofline for a formal Thunderbird-style notchback that cost the Blue Oval dearly in aerodynamic drag on the big tracks like Daytona. At the Atlanta 500 in 1962, Ford and the Holman & Moody team showed up with a "Starlift" removable hardtop shaped like the aero-sleek '61 Starliner coupe that bolted onto the convertible and was allegedly available over the counter, though the stock convertible windows didn't fit the top's openings. NASCAR OK'd it for that race, Ford won, and NASCAR instantly kiboshed the cheater top. The fix: a crash program to design the Galaxie Sports Hardtop (aka slantback, fastback, or scatback in the day), which made its production debut in mid-March as a 1963 model. Available only on top Galaxie 500 and 500 XL models, the new roofline lowered the top by 2 inches and elevated the car's lap speed at Daytona from 155 to 159 mph, according to tests conducted by Hot Rod magazine in February 1963 in a 406-powered prototype. Drag was reportedly lowered by 28 percent. But that roofline wasn't the only trick Ford had up its sleeve. Taking full advantage of NASCAR's new 7.0-liter displacement limit, Ford bored the 406 out 0.1 inch and strengthened the engine considerably with impact-extruded pistons, stronger connecting rods and cross-bolted main-bearing caps, improved cylinder heads with bigger valves, etc. Rated at 410 hp and 476 lb-ft with the single-carb NASCAR setup, the 427 boosted lap speed to 161.3 mph in the same Hot Rod test, and in full Homan & Moody race trim the 427 topped 500 hp.
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 427 Badge" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497814/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-427-badge.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497814+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-427-badge.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Badge" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694734/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-badge.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694734+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-badge.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Taillight 2" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694815/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-taillight-2.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694815+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-taillight-2.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Cockpit" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694737/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-cockpit.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/45694737+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-cockpit.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Rear Seats" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497808/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-seats.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497808+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-rear-seats.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
<META content="1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Engine" itemprop="name"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497817/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-engine.jpg itemprop="contentUrl"><META content=http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/roadtests/12q2_1962_chevrolet_impala_ss403_vs_1963_ford_gala xie_500/41497817+w177+h111+cr1+ar0/1963-Ford-Galaxie-500-engine.jpg itemprop="thumbnailUrl">
Next Page
Last edited by Space; 01-13-2013 at 05:42 AM.
#2
01-11-2013, 01:03 PM
I always liked the looks of the old Galaxie but that 409 was a hot motor at the time. I was too young to drive back then but my old friend had a early 60's Galaxie in 72 that we used to tear around the hood in...
#3
01-13-2013, 05:35 AM
Specifications
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Supercharged SS
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Supercharged SS
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED: $31,155 (base price: $27,895)
ENGINE TYPE: supercharged pushrod 16-valve V-6, iron block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 231 cu in, 3791cc
Power (SAE net): 240 bhp @ 5200 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 280 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
Power (SAE net): 240 bhp @ 5200 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 280 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 4-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 110.5 in Length: 197.9 in
Width: 72.7 in Height: 55.2 in
Curb weight: 3530 lb
Wheelbase: 110.5 in Length: 197.9 in
Width: 72.7 in Height: 55.2 in
Curb weight: 3530 lb
C/D-TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.1 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 112 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 186 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g
Zero to 60 mph: 6.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.1 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 112 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 186 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA fuel economy, city driving : 18 mpg
C/D-observed: 18 mpg
EPA fuel economy, city driving : 18 mpg
C/D-observed: 18 mpg
SHORT TAKE ROAD TEST<HGROUP style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; MARGIN: 0px; OUTLINE-STYLE: none; OUTLINE-COLOR: invert; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; OUTLINE-WIDTH: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: block; VERTICAL-ALIGN: baseline; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Supercharged SS
Not exactly the one Little E. drives.
</HGROUP></HEADER>
- JULY 2004
- BY RON KIINO
- PHOTOGRAPHY BY DANIEL V. WINTER
Jeff Gordon drives one. So do Tony Stewart and Jimmie Johnson. Heck, even Dale Earnhardt Jr. slaps his No. 8 on one. We're talking about the Chevy Monte Carlo--specifically, the NASCAR race car, Little E.'s winning ride at this year's Daytona 500, not to mention the most victorious nameplate in NASCAR history. With accolades like that, there's no arguing the M.C.'s racing success.
The street version of this famous namesake, however, hasn't received the same fanfare lately. The old practice of "race on Sunday, sell on Monday" was worth exactly 66,976 new-car sales of the Monte Carlo to Chevy in 2003. That's a far cry from the success Ford has run up with its NASCAR nameplate--the Taurus found 300,496 takers--and almost 10,000 shy of Dodge's stock-car-inspired sedan, the Intrepid, at 76,473. And let's not forget the Monte's corporate sibling and NASCAR foe, the Pontiac Grand Prix, which sold 125,441 units.
Perhaps the Monte Carlo's biggest problem in '03 was that in standard SS form it topped out at 200 horsepower. Channeled through a four-speed automatic transmission, that oomph was anything but NASCAR-like. For 2004, Chevy is offering a spiced-up M.C. that it hopes can build some excitement (sorry, Pontiac) and boost those fourth-place sales.
That Carlo caliente is the Supercharged SS you see on this page. How do we know it's supercharged? Well, it says so--in huge script on the rear quarter-panels, and also on the dash and on the kick plates. So conspicuous are the labels that staffers began querying sarcastically, "Are you surethat's supercharged?" Chevy made other less-obvious modifications, adding a decklid spoiler, fog lamps, dual stainless-steel exhaust tips, and 17-inch diamond-cut wheels shod with Goodyear Eagles. The Supercharged SS looks sportier than its tamer siblings, but it's still not especially handsome to our eyes.
Underneath, the changes are more significant. The ride height has been lowered almost half an inch, the spring rates are said to be stiffer at all four corners, and the anti-roll bars are larger front and rear. Obviously, the biggest upgrade is what lurks under the hood--a supercharged version of GM's 3800 Series II pushrod V-6, which makes 240 horsepower at 5200 rpm and 280 pound-feet of torque at 3600 and is paired with a beefier four-speed auto. Compared with the standard SS, that's an upgrade of 40 horsepower and 55 pound-feet.
At the track, the Monte's newfound power and chassis enhancements were evident. We ripped off 0 to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds and the quarter-mile in 15.1 at 93 mph, 2.1 and 1.5 seconds quicker, respectively, than the numbers put up by a standard SS ("Low-Impact Sports," September 2002). Moreover, the Supercharged SS's wider, lower-profile tires (235/55R-17s versus 225/60R-16s) and tauter suspension held on for 0.83 g at the skidpad, a sizable improvement over the SS's 0.79. Ride quality has diminished slightly compared with the SS's conservatively tuned suppleness, but it's a welcome trade-off. And Chevy's engineers have done a commendable job of quelling the torque-steer issue. Braking was vastly better, too--70 mph to a standstill came in 186 feet, 20 feet shorter--and pedal feel was linear and easy to modulate.
There are more pros to pile on this blown Monte Carlo. The structure is about as shaky as Gibraltar, the fit and finish is respectable, and the interior is roomy and comfortable, especially in the back seat.
The street version of this famous namesake, however, hasn't received the same fanfare lately. The old practice of "race on Sunday, sell on Monday" was worth exactly 66,976 new-car sales of the Monte Carlo to Chevy in 2003. That's a far cry from the success Ford has run up with its NASCAR nameplate--the Taurus found 300,496 takers--and almost 10,000 shy of Dodge's stock-car-inspired sedan, the Intrepid, at 76,473. And let's not forget the Monte's corporate sibling and NASCAR foe, the Pontiac Grand Prix, which sold 125,441 units.
Perhaps the Monte Carlo's biggest problem in '03 was that in standard SS form it topped out at 200 horsepower. Channeled through a four-speed automatic transmission, that oomph was anything but NASCAR-like. For 2004, Chevy is offering a spiced-up M.C. that it hopes can build some excitement (sorry, Pontiac) and boost those fourth-place sales.
That Carlo caliente is the Supercharged SS you see on this page. How do we know it's supercharged? Well, it says so--in huge script on the rear quarter-panels, and also on the dash and on the kick plates. So conspicuous are the labels that staffers began querying sarcastically, "Are you surethat's supercharged?" Chevy made other less-obvious modifications, adding a decklid spoiler, fog lamps, dual stainless-steel exhaust tips, and 17-inch diamond-cut wheels shod with Goodyear Eagles. The Supercharged SS looks sportier than its tamer siblings, but it's still not especially handsome to our eyes.
Underneath, the changes are more significant. The ride height has been lowered almost half an inch, the spring rates are said to be stiffer at all four corners, and the anti-roll bars are larger front and rear. Obviously, the biggest upgrade is what lurks under the hood--a supercharged version of GM's 3800 Series II pushrod V-6, which makes 240 horsepower at 5200 rpm and 280 pound-feet of torque at 3600 and is paired with a beefier four-speed auto. Compared with the standard SS, that's an upgrade of 40 horsepower and 55 pound-feet.
At the track, the Monte's newfound power and chassis enhancements were evident. We ripped off 0 to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds and the quarter-mile in 15.1 at 93 mph, 2.1 and 1.5 seconds quicker, respectively, than the numbers put up by a standard SS ("Low-Impact Sports," September 2002). Moreover, the Supercharged SS's wider, lower-profile tires (235/55R-17s versus 225/60R-16s) and tauter suspension held on for 0.83 g at the skidpad, a sizable improvement over the SS's 0.79. Ride quality has diminished slightly compared with the SS's conservatively tuned suppleness, but it's a welcome trade-off. And Chevy's engineers have done a commendable job of quelling the torque-steer issue. Braking was vastly better, too--70 mph to a standstill came in 186 feet, 20 feet shorter--and pedal feel was linear and easy to modulate.
There are more pros to pile on this blown Monte Carlo. The structure is about as shaky as Gibraltar, the fit and finish is respectable, and the interior is roomy and comfortable, especially in the back seat.
Of course, with pros come cons. The supercharged Monte still delivers a numb steering sensation that Led Zeppelin would describe as a communication breakdown. It feels overassisted and lacks precise, direct feedback to the driver. The ebony interior is just that--dark, cold, monotonous--and the quality of the plastics seems low-rent. Then there are the matters of poundage and price. The Supercharged SS weighs 3530 pounds and has a $27,895 base price. Compared with a $26,990 Honda Accord Coupe EX V-6 (September 2003) with a six-speed manual and a $23,460 Toyota Camry Solara SE Sport V-6 (October 2003), the Chevy puts the biggest dent in the pavement and your pocketbook. Not helping the Monte's case are the Accord's acceleration times, which are all quicker, or the Solara's Lexus-like cockpit, which, in light (we wish) of the Monte Carlo's second-rate interior, is like comparing Hugo Boss with Boss Hogg.
That said, this latest street iteration of Chevy's famed racing coupe does offer up performance that far surpasses that of the standard SS, a car that tested at $24,575. For an additional $3320, that's a serious bump in the bang-for-the-buck department. Plus, with all that torque on tap, the Supercharged SS easily chirps its front tires--which may be all that's needed to boost sales and the passion among Chevy's NASCAR faithful.Continued...
<NAV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px; OUTLINE-STYLE: none; OUTLINE-COLOR: invert; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; OUTLINE-WIDTH: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: block; FONT: 11px/13px Georgia, serif; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: rgb(68,68,68); VERTICAL-ALIGN: baseline; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; WORD-SPACING: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=mod>That said, this latest street iteration of Chevy's famed racing coupe does offer up performance that far surpasses that of the standard SS, a car that tested at $24,575. For an additional $3320, that's a serious bump in the bang-for-the-buck department. Plus, with all that torque on tap, the Supercharged SS easily chirps its front tires--which may be all that's needed to boost sales and the passion among Chevy's NASCAR faithful.Continued...
Last edited by Space; 01-13-2013 at 06:08 AM.
#4
01-13-2013, 05:41 AM
COMPARISON TESTS<HGROUP style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; MARGIN: 0px; OUTLINE-STYLE: none; OUTLINE-COLOR: invert; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; OUTLINE-WIDTH: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: block; VERTICAL-ALIGN: baseline; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">
2002 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS vs. Ford Mustang GT, Dodge Stratus R/T
Member's, guess which one won 
WHAT 
Low-Impact Sports: You say you want to narrow the choices in the $25,000 all-American coupe sweepstakes? Well, here they are — all three of 'em.
</HGROUP></HEADER>
- SEPTEMBER 2002
- BY TONY SWAN
- PHOTOGRAPHY BY AARON KILEY
Turns out not everyone who wants the visual vim and patriotic panache of an American sports coupe finds it necessary to personally supervise each and every gear selection by operating that lever located between the front seats. Take these three cars, which are the entire menu of sporty Big Three two-doors competing in the $25,000 neighborhood. Although two of the three (the Mustang and the Stratus) come with manual gearboxes as standard equipment, most owners prefer to leave the shifting to the car's engine-transmission management system. (Asterisk: To their credit, about 55 percent of Mustang GT and SVT Cobra buyers want to manage gear selection for themselves. But that percentage drops to 33 when base Mustangs, with V-6 engines, are factored into the equation. The mix skews much more heavily toward minimal driver involvement with the Stratus two-door -- 78 percent are automatics, and even for the sportier R/Ts, it's 77 percent.) And since the Monte Carlo is automatic only, we specified automatics for all the players.
We didn't invite the Stratus-twin Chrysler Sebring, or the walking-dead Chevy Camaro and Pontiac Firebird, since their contracts won't be renewed for 2003, and then learned that another apparently eligible contender -- the two-door version of the Pontiac Grand Prix -- had also been consigned to history. The two-door Grand Prix went out of production in August, and there won't be an equivalent car in the Excitement Division lineup until the Americanized version of the Holden Monaro makes its appearance as the 2004 GTO.
We didn't invite the Stratus-twin Chrysler Sebring, or the walking-dead Chevy Camaro and Pontiac Firebird, since their contracts won't be renewed for 2003, and then learned that another apparently eligible contender -- the two-door version of the Pontiac Grand Prix -- had also been consigned to history. The two-door Grand Prix went out of production in August, and there won't be an equivalent car in the Excitement Division lineup until the Americanized version of the Holden Monaro makes its appearance as the 2004 GTO.
The U.S. sports-coupe hood count doesn't increase much even when you throw a lasso around the entire category. The Ford ZX2 and Mercury Cougar both disappear at the end of the '02 model year, making the low end of the spectrum an all-General Motors show: the aging Chevy Cavalier Z24 and Pontiac Sunfire GT, and the new-for-'03 Saturn Ion, which replaces the SC lineup. And that's the lot.Since we were insistent about transmission choice, you may wonder why there's a disparity in price and, in particular, power. Here's the rationale. The Monte Carlo SS, which wound up wearing the heaviest price tag of our trio, starts at $23,860. That's a lot more than a manual Mustang V-6 at $18,100 ($18,915 for an automatic). Since it was possible to have V-8 power and stay within the pricing parameters, we opted for the GT. However, the Mustang that showed up for this showdown was loaded with other goodies, including some $1300 worth of audio add-ons.
The Stratus was shortest on muscle -- 200 hp and 205 pound-feet of torque are as good as it gets -- but by checking enough options boxes, we didn't have much trouble getting it into the same price stratum as its cross-town competitors.
Our flog was conducted near the small town of Coshocton, Ohio, home of Roscoe Village (and Bob Brenly, the sign said). Make that Historic Roscoe Village -- a collection of restored buildings on a street paved with bricks, established during the heyday of the Ohio & Erie Canal (from 1825). And how Ohio is this? The burg's big restaurant closes at 8 p.m. Nearby, we encountered some meandering roads in the hilly country west of town that we had not previously pillaged.
Would power prevail over sophistication and style? Only one way to find out. Continued...
<NAV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px; OUTLINE-STYLE: none; OUTLINE-COLOR: invert; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; OUTLINE-WIDTH: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: block; FONT: 11px/13px Georgia, serif; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: rgb(68,68,68); VERTICAL-ALIGN: baseline; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; WORD-SPACING: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=mod>
Last edited by Space; 01-13-2013 at 06:07 AM.
#5
01-13-2013, 03:47 PM
My friends brother had a 1964 Pontiac, rag, 409 425 hp, 4 speed...back in the 60's..all He can remember about it (my friend)..is the godawful WAIL!..of all 8 barrels opening up, the sideways slip, as it pulled away from the lights, and the enormous amount of tire smoke from the 7:75 x14 bias tires..from that day forward...I have been a 409 fan...
#6
01-13-2013, 03:50 PM
Big Block 1964 Galaxy's have always turned my crank too...just something about a big ol' boat, specially with the funky bubble scoop they had back then...too cool...
#7
01-13-2013, 04:04 PM
My friends brother had a 1964 Pontiac, rag, 409 425 hp, 4 speed...back in the 60's..all He can remember about it (my friend)..is the godawful WAIL!..of all 8 barrels opening up, the sideways slip, as it pulled away from the lights, and the enormous amount of tire smoke from the 7:75 x14 bias tires..from that day forward...I have been a 409 fan...
I had a '64 LeMans w/GTO option and it was equipped with a 389 tri-power backed by a 4 speed. It would definitely put on a smoke show and come out of the hole sideways if you wanted it to. 
#8
01-13-2013, 04:10 PM
Nope! it was a 409..up in Canada you could get a Chevy engine in anything made by Pontiac,,it WAS a 409...his Brother later had a 1969 Pontiac Parisian , station wagon with a 396, and they came from the factory that way...
Pontiacs , up here came with 283's..up to 427s, or any variant...the GTO's were different..they came with Pontiac engines...
Pontiacs , up here came with 283's..up to 427s, or any variant...the GTO's were different..they came with Pontiac engines...
Last edited by CDN85MonteCarlo; 01-13-2013 at 04:13 PM.
#9
01-13-2013, 04:16 PM
Nope! it was a 409..up in Canada you could get a Chevy engine in anything made by Pontiac,,it WAS a 409...his Brother later had a 1969 Pontiac Parisian , station wagon with a 396, and they came from the factory that way...
Pontiacs , up here came with 283's..up to 427s, or any variant...the GTO's were different..they came with Pontiac engines...
Pontiacs , up here came with 283's..up to 427s, or any variant...the GTO's were different..they came with Pontiac engines...
If we wanted something like that it had to be of the homegrown variety...which there were several of...
#10
01-13-2013, 09:24 PM
That's pretty cool that they dropped the Chevy engine in the Pontiacs. If we wanted something like that it had to be of the homegrown variety...which there were several of...
Firebirds, Trans Ams, Gto's all came with the Poncho engines...but I can remember a LOT!, of Big cars with the smallblock 283/307/327/350s in em..
It seems quite a few people up here ordered Big Blocks in wagons...so it wasn't uncommon to see late 60's Pontiac wagons with either a 396, or a 427...towing I guess.
And Canada had their own version of the Nova/Chevy II..called the Acadian, and Beaumont for Chevelle...they came with Chevy engines...
Firebirds, Trans Ams, Gto's all came with the Poncho engines...but I can remember a LOT!, of Big cars with the smallblock 283/307/327/350s in em..
It seems quite a few people up here ordered Big Blocks in wagons...so it wasn't uncommon to see late 60's Pontiac wagons with either a 396, or a 427...towing I guess.
And Canada had their own version of the Nova/Chevy II..called the Acadian, and Beaumont for Chevelle...they came with Chevy engines...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Space
General Monte Carlo Talk
7
05-06-2010 09:38 AM
