Supercar "roots"
 

Since I am home with a head cold this week I have plenty of time to think up stuff and post it on the forum.

Here's a question I came up with while shaving this morning:

Since the Supercar Registry and this forum deal mainly with 1967-69 Camaros, 1966-70 Chevelles, and 1968-70 Novas that have been modified either by dealerships or through the COPO system into higher-performance "Supercars" with 427 engines*, is it fair to say that the whole "Supercar" category, as we know it, began in earnest with the 1967 Camaro SS?

I realize that Joel Rosen was performing 427 swaps in new '66 Chevelle SS cars, as were some other dealers at the buyer's request, but it seems the term "Supercar" really began with the '67 Camaro. I have a 1967 Hi-Performance Cars magazine with a story on Motion's first "SS 427" Camaro conversion (from a 350 car) and in that same magazine is a Motion ad saying that SS 427 "Supercars" were available through Baldwin-Motion. Is that the first use of "Supercars" to describe the cars we consider as such today?

Full disclosure: I have a '67 RS/SS 396 Camaro and it seems to me that since this is basically the "father" of the big-block "Supercar" craze, shouldn't it be considered a "Supercar" too? No, it's certainly not worth as much as a COPO or a dealer car, and as such, it isn't nearly as desirable.

I suppose other fathers of the Supercar movement should be mentioned: the '65 Z16, the '66 SS 396 Chevelle. But I think things really took off with the '67 Camaro.

*Apologies to Yenko Stinger and Deuce fans as well as '70 454 Chevelle fans--all three are super cars in their own right but I think they are in categories of their own, as is the 427 Corvette. I think the 427 engine swap into hardtops with back seats is what defines the "Supercar" category.

Okay, let's hear it!

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Don't get hung-up in the word "Supercar". All the cars you mention are desirable in their own time as well as now.

A similar question is: What is a Muscle Car?

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Hard to say where our roots began. Maybe in the '50s at the old airstrips in CA, maybe with the factory light weight cars, or the early hemis, maybe the Z-11s, Z-16s, etc. Could be the '60s when the dealers we honor today all sponsered racecars, including altered wheelbase cars, funnycars, superstockers and stock class cars.

But, as you say, it really took off in '67, with the Camaro. Once Chevy introduced the Camaro, the performance wars really heated up, at the track and on the street. Dealers, some with factory support, speed shops, the home hobbist, all doing their best to to out perform the next guy. Mix in the catchy radio ads, the print ads that guaranteed success if you bought such and such car/part. And yes, some of these folks labeling their creations "supercars". All part of the legacy, and yes, mystique.

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Wow...interesting debate. It's often said that the "first musclecar" is the '64 Pontiac GTO, supported by the basic argument that a "musclecar" by definition is a mid-sized body with a full sized engine. By that definition I suppose the GTO has bragging rights. I'll agree that the Corvette shouldn't count because it's always been a 2 seater "sports car" regardless of it's engine size or performance capability. However, in my own personal opinion, and feel free to agree or disagree, that's the beauty of opinions, everyone's entitled to their own, I think a "musclecar" by definition, should be any car that was designed and factory produced with the intention of providing a high performance/race oriented vehicle at a low cost, particularly at the expense of comfort or luxury features. Under that definition, I think '57 150 "Black Widow" or '62 409/409 Bel Air. Also, 427 Fairlane/Galaxie, Wedge/HEMI Super Stock Dodge/Plymouth and so on and so forth. If it's main purpose was goin' fast more than lookin' pretty, it's a musclecar in my book. Now that's not to say the expensive loaded up cars like the '65 Z-16 SS396/375 Chevelle shouldn't be called a musclecar, it's just that a stripped heater/radio delete 409 car more fits the nomenclature for me.

As far as "Supercars" go...to me that's a bit grayer. Usually it means anything above and beyond what a "regular person" could get as a "regular production option." A "Supercar" typically must have some specially ordered or dealer added high performance equipment. Here's where we fence sit on RPO'd cars like '70 LS-6 Chevelles, and Charger Daytonas/Superbirds and the like. While undoubtedly performance oriented and significant in their own rights, I personally don't lump these cars into the "Supercar" category. I'm sure many will present an excellent argument to disagree here. I will say I don't think these terms should be written in stone, nor do I deny there being exceptions to these simple rules, this is just my personal take and personal definition of the terms. I guess I'm saying use these guidelines loosely, and decide for yourself. One thing I can say with certainty is that "Musclecars" are purely American. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/3gears.gif

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Well an Olds 88 was pretty impressive ,to some it started it all !!But thats a stratch...things started heating up in 57 and by 61 the pace really quickened... Pontiac was whipping a lot of butt in 61 https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/show...65&fpart=1

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Belair, I could agree more. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

Well Bill, sorry to hear that you're under the weather. I don't have time to get sick, our company has promotions lined up through the beginning of December! No weekends off for me! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

I have to agree with Supercar Kid and Bill on the fact that the musclecar craze really started with Chevy's answer to the Mustang. What an answer it was! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/smile.gif

My opinion on Supercars is that they're the "one off" models that were produced in limited numbers, intended to be used for the purpose of being the baddest in town. Whether it was proven on a track, or on some side street, the word got around. To me, this would include, but not be limited to:

1)1967 RS/SS Big Block Camaros (first year of production of this vehicle)
2)Z-16 Chevelles
3)Boss 429 Mustangs
4)1969 Barracuda Formula S 383
5)1968 Cougar GT-E with the 427(rare) or the 428(rarer!)
6)1967 Z/28
7)1969 Trans Am
8)1973 Formula 455SD or SD455 Trans Am
9)COPO Camaros
10)L78 Novas
11)L79 Novas
12)Anything 426 Hemi
13) Dealer Modified Cars(Yenko,Nickey,Dana, Bill Thomas, et al.)

With the exception of the Z-16, the rest in this abbreviated list were all from around the time of the initial release of the Camaro. The initial factory "wars" made it very interesting for the general public.

You remember the phrase "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday".
That was one of the big deciding factors for a teenager who wanted the baddest and the best at the time.

I love any and all the cars from that era...as that was the time I was most influenced by them. I can also appreciate the Z-11's, max wedges, 409's, 421 lightweights, 427 galaxies, etc. But these were BIG cars, with BIG engines, and had weight saving measures done to lighten them up.

Different were the cars listed above. They were smaller cars, with bigger engines (power to weight ratio), and were sportier in a lot of ways...better handling and better braking...

I hope that I didn't make anyone angry, but it's only "My" opinion
https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/cool.gif

Bruce

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

What about cars that were made specifically for racing in mind. Such as the 57 supercharged thunderbirds (which in my opinion is an overlooked and underated car), they were made specifically to compete against corvettes, hence a factory race car. How about the 64-65 Thunderbolts, awesome factory racer made to go after the Max Wedge cars. Or the 68 Hemi Dart with it's bare bones "gotcha by the ball's attitude". Personally i would rank these cars as Supercars as they are more than just muscle cars. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/scholar.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

[ QUOTE ]
What about cars that were made specifically for racing in mind. Such as the 57 supercharged thunderbirds (which in my opinion is an overlooked and underated car), they were made specifically to compete against corvettes, hence a factory race car.

[/ QUOTE ]Those early Thunderbirds were 2 seat "sports cars" just like a Corvette, sure they were designed with performance in mind, but they were also designed with the intention of being a luxurious, and expensive, "gentleman's car." Those supercharged 'birds are significant cars for sure, but they were simply too luxurious and too costly, not to mention the 2 seat factor, to be considered a musclecar in my opinion. HEMI Dart? Supercar for sure! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif

Re: Supercar "roots"
 

I see that you missed the 70 LS-6 chevelle? Is 4475 not limited enough? Just curious..."MOF" https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/3gears.gif