Actually they tried in ‘64, when they based the chassis and body dimensions for the Chevelle off the tri-five Chevy platform.

One of the factors that acceleration times 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile have decreased or are comparable to monster motored muscle cars is the 6 speed manual transmissions.

Road & Track magazine tested a 180-horsepower ‘55 with a three-speed manual-plus-overdrive transmission, which gave it a 4.11:1 rear axle ratio. They recorded 0-to-96 km/h (60 mph) acceleration time of 9.7 seconds.

This must have been a 265 power pack with a 4 barrel carburator, and a 3 speed column shift was cumbersome to shift quickly from 1 to 2, lots of linkages moving around.

GM’s 58 models were, as all their “all new” models in those times, three years in gestation, meaning they were basically set design-wise by 1955. GM had no way of responding to Chrysler’s 1957 forward look cars until the 1959 model year.

Actually, GM had planned a 3 year run for the 58 bodies, as was their usual custom. But when the designers saw early production models of Chrysler’s ‘57 car lines, they staged a mutiny against Harley Earl and convinced management to scrap the 58 bodies after one year and tool up longer lower wider all new bodies for ‘59.

It depends on who you ask. David E. Davis denied it, but the Royal Pontiac mechanic who prepped C/D’s test GTO says it did indeed have a 421, because he put it there. The car itself is lost to the ages, but I think it very likely that it had a 421 Super Duty engine dressed to look like a 389 (not difficult, since they were externally nigh identical).

Not only was the HP rating usually a little ambitious, the speedometers were also ambitious by several mph…they had more power and went faster than actual.

The 57 Chevies with a power brake and a power steering (the pump behind the generator) replacing the spark plugs on the left side was an undertaking, and a test of patience.

During the muscle car years manufacturers did the opposite and downrated the motors, there seemed to be an understanding that 425/435HP was the advertised horsepower rating, with the actual horsepower being much higher.

Replacing the 6 cyl with a small block was beyond easy with those cars which is another reason they were always very popular.

The cars as well as the V8 engine have become icons.

Hope you manage to find one! I know looks are subjective…this thing really doesn’t do it for me. But as someone else has already mentioned, difference in opinion is what makes the world go round.

GTO, anyone?

Didn’t they admit that the one compared to a Ferrari GTO was a 421, not a 389?

There is no formula to ‘convert’ gross horsepower to net. Sometimes you can make rough estimates based on recorded performance, although that’s perilous. Even in the 50’s there was some tendency for road testers to end up with hand-picked engineering test cars (something that would become a cottage industry in the 60’s), and Chevy and Pontiac were both very cagey about the fuel-injected engines when they came out.

Also, 50’s Chevys were handicapped in their real-world performance by the fact that your transmission choices were three on the tree, three on the column plus overdrive, Powerglide (which had only two speeds, plus the torque converter), and, from ‘57-’60, the ill-fated Turboglide, which was sort of a continuously variable transmission using hydraulic torque multiplication, ala Buick’s Triple Turbine Dynaflow. It was a couple more years before you could order four-on-the-floor on anything other than a Corvette.

That’s rather misleading; that was a factory shipping weight, which did not include fuel or fluids. Actual curb weight, with all vital fluids and a full tank of gas, was more like 3,400 pounds. The 3,150 lb figure is also for a model without options. Adding Powerglide, power steering and brakes, and a radio put the at-the-curb weight at more like 3,650 lb.

I remember when the ‘57 Chevy came out.

I know by the time I was in middle school in the early 60s, the ‘55-’57 Chevys were already prized as great used cars, and great lookers also, as you’ve stated.

My mother bought a ‘55 Chevy new, a 210 Delray club coupe (2-door sedan). It was the spiffed-up version of the 210 with a “waffle pattern” all-vinyl interior and full carpeting. The car was a beautiful sky blue with a white roof. She sold it in 1961 to my uncle, who in turn passed it on to his son (my cousin). The last I remember seeing it was in 1964.

Oh, how I wish we’d held on to that car!

If I retrofit it with seat belts it would make a good daily driver.

Speaking also as someone under 25, the ‘57 is a beautiful car, and on my list of cars to own. A bit down on the list, but in the top ten, to be sure.

One of the things that “killed” horsepower in the 70’s was a change in how they measured it. While it certainly seems reasonable to get 286 hp out of a 283 ci engine, I’m not sure if they were really getting those numbers.

The answer is yes.